Cargando…
Comparison of setup accuracy of three different image assessment methods for tangential breast radiotherapy
INTRODUCTION: To compare the differences in setup errors measured with electronic portal image (EPI) and cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) in patients undergoing tangential breast radiotherapy (RT). Relationship between setup errors, body mass index (BMI) and breast size was assessed. METHODS: Tw...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5167282/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27741383 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.180 |
_version_ | 1782483151972466688 |
---|---|
author | Batumalai, Vikneswary Phan, Penny Choong, Callie Holloway, Lois Delaney, Geoff P. |
author_facet | Batumalai, Vikneswary Phan, Penny Choong, Callie Holloway, Lois Delaney, Geoff P. |
author_sort | Batumalai, Vikneswary |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: To compare the differences in setup errors measured with electronic portal image (EPI) and cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) in patients undergoing tangential breast radiotherapy (RT). Relationship between setup errors, body mass index (BMI) and breast size was assessed. METHODS: Twenty‐five patients undergoing postoperative RT to the breast were consented for this study. Weekly CBCT scans were acquired and retrospectively registered to the planning CT in three dimensions, first using bony anatomy for bony registration (CBCT‐B) and again using breast tissue outline for soft tissue registration (CBCT‐S). Digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRR) generated from CBCT to simulate EPI were compared to the planning DRR using bony anatomy in the V (parallel to the cranio‐caudal axis) and U (perpendicular to V) planes. The systematic (Σ) and random (σ) errors were calculated and correlated with BMI and breast size. RESULTS: The systematic and random errors for EPI (Σ (V) = 3.7 mm, Σ (U) = 2.8 mm and σ (V) = 2.9 mm, σ (U) = 2.5) and CBCT‐B (Σ (V) = 3.5 mm, Σ (U) = 3.4 mm and σ (V) = 2.8 mm, σ (U) = 2.8) were of similar magnitude in the V and U planes. Similarly, the differences in setup errors for CBCT‐B and CBCT‐S in three dimensions were less than 1 mm. Only CBCT‐S setup error correlated with BMI and breast size. CONCLUSIONS: CBCT and EPI show insignificant variation in their ability to detect setup error. These findings suggest no significant differences that would make one modality considered superior over the other and EPI should remain the standard of care for most patients. However, there is a correlation with breast size, BMI and setup error as detected by CBCT‐S, justifying the use of CBCT‐S for larger patients. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5167282 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51672822016-12-28 Comparison of setup accuracy of three different image assessment methods for tangential breast radiotherapy Batumalai, Vikneswary Phan, Penny Choong, Callie Holloway, Lois Delaney, Geoff P. J Med Radiat Sci Original Articles INTRODUCTION: To compare the differences in setup errors measured with electronic portal image (EPI) and cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) in patients undergoing tangential breast radiotherapy (RT). Relationship between setup errors, body mass index (BMI) and breast size was assessed. METHODS: Twenty‐five patients undergoing postoperative RT to the breast were consented for this study. Weekly CBCT scans were acquired and retrospectively registered to the planning CT in three dimensions, first using bony anatomy for bony registration (CBCT‐B) and again using breast tissue outline for soft tissue registration (CBCT‐S). Digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRR) generated from CBCT to simulate EPI were compared to the planning DRR using bony anatomy in the V (parallel to the cranio‐caudal axis) and U (perpendicular to V) planes. The systematic (Σ) and random (σ) errors were calculated and correlated with BMI and breast size. RESULTS: The systematic and random errors for EPI (Σ (V) = 3.7 mm, Σ (U) = 2.8 mm and σ (V) = 2.9 mm, σ (U) = 2.5) and CBCT‐B (Σ (V) = 3.5 mm, Σ (U) = 3.4 mm and σ (V) = 2.8 mm, σ (U) = 2.8) were of similar magnitude in the V and U planes. Similarly, the differences in setup errors for CBCT‐B and CBCT‐S in three dimensions were less than 1 mm. Only CBCT‐S setup error correlated with BMI and breast size. CONCLUSIONS: CBCT and EPI show insignificant variation in their ability to detect setup error. These findings suggest no significant differences that would make one modality considered superior over the other and EPI should remain the standard of care for most patients. However, there is a correlation with breast size, BMI and setup error as detected by CBCT‐S, justifying the use of CBCT‐S for larger patients. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-05-31 2016-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5167282/ /pubmed/27741383 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.180 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Batumalai, Vikneswary Phan, Penny Choong, Callie Holloway, Lois Delaney, Geoff P. Comparison of setup accuracy of three different image assessment methods for tangential breast radiotherapy |
title | Comparison of setup accuracy of three different image assessment methods for tangential breast radiotherapy |
title_full | Comparison of setup accuracy of three different image assessment methods for tangential breast radiotherapy |
title_fullStr | Comparison of setup accuracy of three different image assessment methods for tangential breast radiotherapy |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of setup accuracy of three different image assessment methods for tangential breast radiotherapy |
title_short | Comparison of setup accuracy of three different image assessment methods for tangential breast radiotherapy |
title_sort | comparison of setup accuracy of three different image assessment methods for tangential breast radiotherapy |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5167282/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27741383 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.180 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT batumalaivikneswary comparisonofsetupaccuracyofthreedifferentimageassessmentmethodsfortangentialbreastradiotherapy AT phanpenny comparisonofsetupaccuracyofthreedifferentimageassessmentmethodsfortangentialbreastradiotherapy AT choongcallie comparisonofsetupaccuracyofthreedifferentimageassessmentmethodsfortangentialbreastradiotherapy AT hollowaylois comparisonofsetupaccuracyofthreedifferentimageassessmentmethodsfortangentialbreastradiotherapy AT delaneygeoffp comparisonofsetupaccuracyofthreedifferentimageassessmentmethodsfortangentialbreastradiotherapy |