Cargando…

Endobiliary Stent Position Changes during External-beam Radiotherapy

PURPOSE: Endobiliary stents can be used as surrogates for pancreatic localization when using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) during external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT). This work reports on interfraction stent position changes during EBRT for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). MATERIALS A...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chu, Kwun-Ye, Eccles, Cynthia L., Brunner, Thomas B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4467517/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26090069
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmir.2014.08.004
Descripción
Sumario:PURPOSE: Endobiliary stents can be used as surrogates for pancreatic localization when using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) during external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT). This work reports on interfraction stent position changes during EBRT for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six patients with endobiliary stents who underwent EBRT for LAPC were assessed. Measurements from the most superior aspect of the stent (sup stent) and the most inferior aspect of the stent (inf stent) to the most inferior, posterior aspect of the L1 vertebra central spinous process were determined from daily treatment CBCTs and compared with those determined from the planning computed tomography (CT) scan. Changes in stent-L1 measurements were interpreted as changes in relative stent position. RESULTS: Three patients showed mean interfraction stent position changes of ≥1 cm when treatment measurements were compared with planning measurements. The sup stent for patient A moved to the right (2.66 ± 2.77 cm) and inferiorly (3.0 ± 3.12 cm), and the inf stent moved to the right (1.92 ± 2.02 cm) inferiorly (3.23 ± 3.34 cm) and posteriorly (1.41 ± 1.43 cm). The inf stent for patient B moved superiorly (2.23 ± 0.49 cm) and posteriorly (1.72 ± 0.59 cm). The sup and inf stent for patient F moved inferiorly (0.98 ± 0.35 cm and 1.21 ± 0.38 cm, respectively). The remaining three patients C, D, and E showed interfraction position changes of <1 cm. CONCLUSION: Endobiliary stent migration and deformation were observed in a small subset of patients. Further investigation is required before confirming their use as surrogates for LAPC target localization during image-guided EBRT.