Cargando…

Analysis of translational errors in frame-based and frameless cranial radiosurgery using an anthropomorphic phantom

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate three-dimensional translational setup errors and residual errors in image-guided radiosurgery, comparing frameless and frame-based techniques, using an anthropomorphic phantom. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We initially used specific phantoms for the calibration and quality control o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Almeida, Taynná Vernalha Rocha, Cordova Junior, Arno Lotar, Piedade, Pedro Argolo, da Silva, Cintia Mara, Marins, Priscila, Almeida, Cristiane Maria, Brincas, Gabriela R. Baseggio, Soboll, Danyel Scheidegger
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Colégio Brasileiro de Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4851478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27141132
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0100-3984.2015.0053
_version_ 1782429821583753216
author Almeida, Taynná Vernalha Rocha
Cordova Junior, Arno Lotar
Piedade, Pedro Argolo
da Silva, Cintia Mara
Marins, Priscila
Almeida, Cristiane Maria
Brincas, Gabriela R. Baseggio
Soboll, Danyel Scheidegger
author_facet Almeida, Taynná Vernalha Rocha
Cordova Junior, Arno Lotar
Piedade, Pedro Argolo
da Silva, Cintia Mara
Marins, Priscila
Almeida, Cristiane Maria
Brincas, Gabriela R. Baseggio
Soboll, Danyel Scheidegger
author_sort Almeida, Taynná Vernalha Rocha
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To evaluate three-dimensional translational setup errors and residual errors in image-guided radiosurgery, comparing frameless and frame-based techniques, using an anthropomorphic phantom. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We initially used specific phantoms for the calibration and quality control of the image-guided system. For the hidden target test, we used an Alderson Radiation Therapy (ART)-210 anthropomorphic head phantom, into which we inserted four 5mm metal balls to simulate target treatment volumes. Computed tomography images were the taken with the head phantom properly positioned for frameless and frame-based radiosurgery. RESULTS: For the frameless technique, the mean error magnitude was 0.22 ± 0.04 mm for setup errors and 0.14 ± 0.02 mm for residual errors, the combined uncertainty being 0.28 mm and 0.16 mm, respectively. For the frame-based technique, the mean error magnitude was 0.73 ± 0.14 mm for setup errors and 0.31 ± 0.04 mm for residual errors, the combined uncertainty being 1.15 mm and 0.63 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: The mean values, standard deviations, and combined uncertainties showed no evidence of a significant differences between the two techniques when the head phantom ART-210 was used.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4851478
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Colégio Brasileiro de Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48514782016-05-02 Analysis of translational errors in frame-based and frameless cranial radiosurgery using an anthropomorphic phantom Almeida, Taynná Vernalha Rocha Cordova Junior, Arno Lotar Piedade, Pedro Argolo da Silva, Cintia Mara Marins, Priscila Almeida, Cristiane Maria Brincas, Gabriela R. Baseggio Soboll, Danyel Scheidegger Radiol Bras Original Articles OBJECTIVE: To evaluate three-dimensional translational setup errors and residual errors in image-guided radiosurgery, comparing frameless and frame-based techniques, using an anthropomorphic phantom. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We initially used specific phantoms for the calibration and quality control of the image-guided system. For the hidden target test, we used an Alderson Radiation Therapy (ART)-210 anthropomorphic head phantom, into which we inserted four 5mm metal balls to simulate target treatment volumes. Computed tomography images were the taken with the head phantom properly positioned for frameless and frame-based radiosurgery. RESULTS: For the frameless technique, the mean error magnitude was 0.22 ± 0.04 mm for setup errors and 0.14 ± 0.02 mm for residual errors, the combined uncertainty being 0.28 mm and 0.16 mm, respectively. For the frame-based technique, the mean error magnitude was 0.73 ± 0.14 mm for setup errors and 0.31 ± 0.04 mm for residual errors, the combined uncertainty being 1.15 mm and 0.63 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: The mean values, standard deviations, and combined uncertainties showed no evidence of a significant differences between the two techniques when the head phantom ART-210 was used. Colégio Brasileiro de Radiologia e Diagnóstico por Imagem 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4851478/ /pubmed/27141132 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0100-3984.2015.0053 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Almeida, Taynná Vernalha Rocha
Cordova Junior, Arno Lotar
Piedade, Pedro Argolo
da Silva, Cintia Mara
Marins, Priscila
Almeida, Cristiane Maria
Brincas, Gabriela R. Baseggio
Soboll, Danyel Scheidegger
Analysis of translational errors in frame-based and frameless cranial radiosurgery using an anthropomorphic phantom
title Analysis of translational errors in frame-based and frameless cranial radiosurgery using an anthropomorphic phantom
title_full Analysis of translational errors in frame-based and frameless cranial radiosurgery using an anthropomorphic phantom
title_fullStr Analysis of translational errors in frame-based and frameless cranial radiosurgery using an anthropomorphic phantom
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of translational errors in frame-based and frameless cranial radiosurgery using an anthropomorphic phantom
title_short Analysis of translational errors in frame-based and frameless cranial radiosurgery using an anthropomorphic phantom
title_sort analysis of translational errors in frame-based and frameless cranial radiosurgery using an anthropomorphic phantom
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4851478/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27141132
http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0100-3984.2015.0053
work_keys_str_mv AT almeidataynnavernalharocha analysisoftranslationalerrorsinframebasedandframelesscranialradiosurgeryusingananthropomorphicphantom
AT cordovajuniorarnolotar analysisoftranslationalerrorsinframebasedandframelesscranialradiosurgeryusingananthropomorphicphantom
AT piedadepedroargolo analysisoftranslationalerrorsinframebasedandframelesscranialradiosurgeryusingananthropomorphicphantom
AT dasilvacintiamara analysisoftranslationalerrorsinframebasedandframelesscranialradiosurgeryusingananthropomorphicphantom
AT marinspriscila analysisoftranslationalerrorsinframebasedandframelesscranialradiosurgeryusingananthropomorphicphantom
AT almeidacristianemaria analysisoftranslationalerrorsinframebasedandframelesscranialradiosurgeryusingananthropomorphicphantom
AT brincasgabrielarbaseggio analysisoftranslationalerrorsinframebasedandframelesscranialradiosurgeryusingananthropomorphicphantom
AT sobolldanyelscheidegger analysisoftranslationalerrorsinframebasedandframelesscranialradiosurgeryusingananthropomorphicphantom