Cargando…
A comparison of two systems of patient immobilization for prostate radiotherapy
BACKGROUND: Reproducibility of different immobilization systems, which may affect set-up errors, remains uncertain. Immobilization systems and their corresponding set-up errors influence the clinical target volume to planning target volume (CTV-PTV) margins and thus may result in undesirable treatme...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3905910/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24447702 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-9-29 |
_version_ | 1782301404607545344 |
---|---|
author | White, Peter Yee, Chui Ka Shan, Lee Chi Chung, Lee Wai Man, Ng Ho Cheung, Yik Shing |
author_facet | White, Peter Yee, Chui Ka Shan, Lee Chi Chung, Lee Wai Man, Ng Ho Cheung, Yik Shing |
author_sort | White, Peter |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Reproducibility of different immobilization systems, which may affect set-up errors, remains uncertain. Immobilization systems and their corresponding set-up errors influence the clinical target volume to planning target volume (CTV-PTV) margins and thus may result in undesirable treatment outcomes. This study compared the reproducibility of patient positioning with Hipfix system and whole body alpha cradle with respect to localized prostate cancer and investigated the existing CTV-PTV margins in the clinical oncology departments of two hospitals. METHODS: Forty sets of data of patients with localized T1-T3 prostate cancer were randomly selected from two regional hospitals, with 20 patients immobilized by a whole-body alpha cradle system and 20 by a thermoplastic Hipfix system. Seven sets of the anterior-posterior (AP), cranial-caudal (CC) and medial-lateral (ML) deviations were collected from each patient. The reproducibility of patient positioning within the two hospitals was compared using a total vector error (TVE) parameter. In addition, CTV-PTV margins were computed using van Herk’s formula. The resulting values were compared to the current CTV-PTV margins in both hospitals. RESULTS: The TVE values were 5.1 and 2.8 mm for the Hipfix and the whole-body alpha cradle systems respectively. TVE associated with the whole-body alpha cradle system was found to be significantly less than the Hipfix system (p < 0.05). The CC axis in the Hipfix system attained the highest frequency of large (23.6%) and serious (7.9%) set-up errors. The calculated CTV to PTV margin was 8.3, 1.9 and 2.3 mm for the Hipfix system, and 2.1, 3.4 and 1.8 mm for the whole body alpha cradle in CC, ML and AP axes respectively. All but one (CC axis using Hipfix) margin calculated did not exceed the corresponding hospital protocol. The whole body alpha cradle system was found to be significantly better than the Hipfix system in terms of reproducibility (p < 0.05), especially in the CC axis. CONCLUSIONS: The whole body alpha cradle system was more reproducible than the Hipfix system. In particular, the difference in CC axis contributed most to the results and the current CC margin for the Hipfix system might be considered as inadequate. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3905910 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-39059102014-02-11 A comparison of two systems of patient immobilization for prostate radiotherapy White, Peter Yee, Chui Ka Shan, Lee Chi Chung, Lee Wai Man, Ng Ho Cheung, Yik Shing Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Reproducibility of different immobilization systems, which may affect set-up errors, remains uncertain. Immobilization systems and their corresponding set-up errors influence the clinical target volume to planning target volume (CTV-PTV) margins and thus may result in undesirable treatment outcomes. This study compared the reproducibility of patient positioning with Hipfix system and whole body alpha cradle with respect to localized prostate cancer and investigated the existing CTV-PTV margins in the clinical oncology departments of two hospitals. METHODS: Forty sets of data of patients with localized T1-T3 prostate cancer were randomly selected from two regional hospitals, with 20 patients immobilized by a whole-body alpha cradle system and 20 by a thermoplastic Hipfix system. Seven sets of the anterior-posterior (AP), cranial-caudal (CC) and medial-lateral (ML) deviations were collected from each patient. The reproducibility of patient positioning within the two hospitals was compared using a total vector error (TVE) parameter. In addition, CTV-PTV margins were computed using van Herk’s formula. The resulting values were compared to the current CTV-PTV margins in both hospitals. RESULTS: The TVE values were 5.1 and 2.8 mm for the Hipfix and the whole-body alpha cradle systems respectively. TVE associated with the whole-body alpha cradle system was found to be significantly less than the Hipfix system (p < 0.05). The CC axis in the Hipfix system attained the highest frequency of large (23.6%) and serious (7.9%) set-up errors. The calculated CTV to PTV margin was 8.3, 1.9 and 2.3 mm for the Hipfix system, and 2.1, 3.4 and 1.8 mm for the whole body alpha cradle in CC, ML and AP axes respectively. All but one (CC axis using Hipfix) margin calculated did not exceed the corresponding hospital protocol. The whole body alpha cradle system was found to be significantly better than the Hipfix system in terms of reproducibility (p < 0.05), especially in the CC axis. CONCLUSIONS: The whole body alpha cradle system was more reproducible than the Hipfix system. In particular, the difference in CC axis contributed most to the results and the current CC margin for the Hipfix system might be considered as inadequate. BioMed Central 2014-01-22 /pmc/articles/PMC3905910/ /pubmed/24447702 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-9-29 Text en Copyright © 2014 White et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research White, Peter Yee, Chui Ka Shan, Lee Chi Chung, Lee Wai Man, Ng Ho Cheung, Yik Shing A comparison of two systems of patient immobilization for prostate radiotherapy |
title | A comparison of two systems of patient immobilization for prostate radiotherapy |
title_full | A comparison of two systems of patient immobilization for prostate radiotherapy |
title_fullStr | A comparison of two systems of patient immobilization for prostate radiotherapy |
title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of two systems of patient immobilization for prostate radiotherapy |
title_short | A comparison of two systems of patient immobilization for prostate radiotherapy |
title_sort | comparison of two systems of patient immobilization for prostate radiotherapy |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3905910/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24447702 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-9-29 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT whitepeter acomparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy AT yeechuika acomparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy AT shanleechi acomparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy AT chungleewai acomparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy AT manngho acomparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy AT cheungyikshing acomparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy AT whitepeter comparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy AT yeechuika comparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy AT shanleechi comparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy AT chungleewai comparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy AT manngho comparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy AT cheungyikshing comparisonoftwosystemsofpatientimmobilizationforprostateradiotherapy |