Cargando…

Quantification and Assessment of Interfraction Setup Errors Based on Cone Beam CT and Determination of Safety Margins for Radiotherapy

INTRODUCTION: To quantify interfraction patient setup-errors for radiotherapy based on cone-beam computed tomography and suggest safety margins accordingly. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Positioning vectors of pre-treatment cone-beam computed tomography for different treatment sites were collected (n = 9504...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cubillos Mesías, Macarena, Boda-Heggemann, Judit, Thoelking, Johannes, Lohr, Frank, Wenz, Frederik, Wertz, Hansjoerg
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4773093/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26930196
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150326
_version_ 1782418670693122048
author Cubillos Mesías, Macarena
Boda-Heggemann, Judit
Thoelking, Johannes
Lohr, Frank
Wenz, Frederik
Wertz, Hansjoerg
author_facet Cubillos Mesías, Macarena
Boda-Heggemann, Judit
Thoelking, Johannes
Lohr, Frank
Wenz, Frederik
Wertz, Hansjoerg
author_sort Cubillos Mesías, Macarena
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: To quantify interfraction patient setup-errors for radiotherapy based on cone-beam computed tomography and suggest safety margins accordingly. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Positioning vectors of pre-treatment cone-beam computed tomography for different treatment sites were collected (n = 9504). For each patient group the total average and standard deviation were calculated and the overall mean, systematic and random errors as well as safety margins were determined. RESULTS: The systematic (and random errors) in the superior-inferior, left-right and anterior-posterior directions were: for prostate, 2.5(3.0), 2.6(3.9) and 2.9(3.9)mm; for prostate bed, 1.7(2.0), 2.2(3.6) and 2.6(3.1)mm; for cervix, 2.8(3.4), 2.3(4.6) and 3.2(3.9)mm; for rectum, 1.6(3.1), 2.1(2.9) and 2.5(3.8)mm; for anal, 1.7(3.7), 2.1(5.1) and 2.5(4.8)mm; for head and neck, 1.9(2.3), 1.4(2.0) and 1.7(2.2)mm; for brain, 1.0(1.5), 1.1(1.4) and 1.0(1.1)mm; and for mediastinum, 3.3(4.6), 2.6(3.7) and 3.5(4.0)mm. The CTV-to-PTV margins had the smallest value for brain (3.6, 3.7 and 3.3mm) and the largest for mediastinum (11.5, 9.1 and 11.6mm). For pelvic treatments the means (and standard deviations) were 7.3 (1.6), 8.5 (0.8) and 9.6 (0.8)mm. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic and random setup-errors were smaller than 5mm. The largest errors were found for organs with higher motion probability. The suggested safety margins were comparable to published values in previous but often smaller studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4773093
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47730932016-03-07 Quantification and Assessment of Interfraction Setup Errors Based on Cone Beam CT and Determination of Safety Margins for Radiotherapy Cubillos Mesías, Macarena Boda-Heggemann, Judit Thoelking, Johannes Lohr, Frank Wenz, Frederik Wertz, Hansjoerg PLoS One Research Article INTRODUCTION: To quantify interfraction patient setup-errors for radiotherapy based on cone-beam computed tomography and suggest safety margins accordingly. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Positioning vectors of pre-treatment cone-beam computed tomography for different treatment sites were collected (n = 9504). For each patient group the total average and standard deviation were calculated and the overall mean, systematic and random errors as well as safety margins were determined. RESULTS: The systematic (and random errors) in the superior-inferior, left-right and anterior-posterior directions were: for prostate, 2.5(3.0), 2.6(3.9) and 2.9(3.9)mm; for prostate bed, 1.7(2.0), 2.2(3.6) and 2.6(3.1)mm; for cervix, 2.8(3.4), 2.3(4.6) and 3.2(3.9)mm; for rectum, 1.6(3.1), 2.1(2.9) and 2.5(3.8)mm; for anal, 1.7(3.7), 2.1(5.1) and 2.5(4.8)mm; for head and neck, 1.9(2.3), 1.4(2.0) and 1.7(2.2)mm; for brain, 1.0(1.5), 1.1(1.4) and 1.0(1.1)mm; and for mediastinum, 3.3(4.6), 2.6(3.7) and 3.5(4.0)mm. The CTV-to-PTV margins had the smallest value for brain (3.6, 3.7 and 3.3mm) and the largest for mediastinum (11.5, 9.1 and 11.6mm). For pelvic treatments the means (and standard deviations) were 7.3 (1.6), 8.5 (0.8) and 9.6 (0.8)mm. CONCLUSIONS: Systematic and random setup-errors were smaller than 5mm. The largest errors were found for organs with higher motion probability. The suggested safety margins were comparable to published values in previous but often smaller studies. Public Library of Science 2016-03-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4773093/ /pubmed/26930196 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150326 Text en © 2016 Cubillos Mesías et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Cubillos Mesías, Macarena
Boda-Heggemann, Judit
Thoelking, Johannes
Lohr, Frank
Wenz, Frederik
Wertz, Hansjoerg
Quantification and Assessment of Interfraction Setup Errors Based on Cone Beam CT and Determination of Safety Margins for Radiotherapy
title Quantification and Assessment of Interfraction Setup Errors Based on Cone Beam CT and Determination of Safety Margins for Radiotherapy
title_full Quantification and Assessment of Interfraction Setup Errors Based on Cone Beam CT and Determination of Safety Margins for Radiotherapy
title_fullStr Quantification and Assessment of Interfraction Setup Errors Based on Cone Beam CT and Determination of Safety Margins for Radiotherapy
title_full_unstemmed Quantification and Assessment of Interfraction Setup Errors Based on Cone Beam CT and Determination of Safety Margins for Radiotherapy
title_short Quantification and Assessment of Interfraction Setup Errors Based on Cone Beam CT and Determination of Safety Margins for Radiotherapy
title_sort quantification and assessment of interfraction setup errors based on cone beam ct and determination of safety margins for radiotherapy
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4773093/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26930196
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0150326
work_keys_str_mv AT cubillosmesiasmacarena quantificationandassessmentofinterfractionsetuperrorsbasedonconebeamctanddeterminationofsafetymarginsforradiotherapy
AT bodaheggemannjudit quantificationandassessmentofinterfractionsetuperrorsbasedonconebeamctanddeterminationofsafetymarginsforradiotherapy
AT thoelkingjohannes quantificationandassessmentofinterfractionsetuperrorsbasedonconebeamctanddeterminationofsafetymarginsforradiotherapy
AT lohrfrank quantificationandassessmentofinterfractionsetuperrorsbasedonconebeamctanddeterminationofsafetymarginsforradiotherapy
AT wenzfrederik quantificationandassessmentofinterfractionsetuperrorsbasedonconebeamctanddeterminationofsafetymarginsforradiotherapy
AT wertzhansjoerg quantificationandassessmentofinterfractionsetuperrorsbasedonconebeamctanddeterminationofsafetymarginsforradiotherapy