Cargando…

End to end comparison of surface‐guided imaging versus stereoscopic X‐rays for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3D anthropomorphic gel phantoms

INTRODUCTION: Two end‐to‐end tests evaluate the accuracy of a surface‐guided radiation therapy (SGRT) system (CRAD Catalyst HD) for position verification in comparison to a stereoscopic x‐ray imaging system (Brainlab Exactrac ) for single‐isocenter, multiple metastases stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bry, Victoria, Saenz, Daniel, Pappas, Evangelos, Kalaitzakis, Georgios, Papanikolaou, Nikos, Rasmussen, Karl
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9121024/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35322526
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13576
_version_ 1784711065760694272
author Bry, Victoria
Saenz, Daniel
Pappas, Evangelos
Kalaitzakis, Georgios
Papanikolaou, Nikos
Rasmussen, Karl
author_facet Bry, Victoria
Saenz, Daniel
Pappas, Evangelos
Kalaitzakis, Georgios
Papanikolaou, Nikos
Rasmussen, Karl
author_sort Bry, Victoria
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Two end‐to‐end tests evaluate the accuracy of a surface‐guided radiation therapy (SGRT) system (CRAD Catalyst HD) for position verification in comparison to a stereoscopic x‐ray imaging system (Brainlab Exactrac ) for single‐isocenter, multiple metastases stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) using 3D polymer gel inserts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 3D‐printed phantom (Prime phantom, RTsafe PC, Athens, Greece) with two separate cylindrical polymer gel inserts were immobilized in open‐face masks and treated with a single isocentric, multitarget SRS plan. Planning was done in Brainlab (Elements) to treat five metastatic lesions in one fraction, and initial setup was done using cone beam computed tomography. Positional verification was done using orthogonal X‐ray imaging (Brainlab Exactrac) and/or a surface imaging system (CRAD Catalyst HD, Uppsala, Sweden), and shift discrepancies were recorded for each couch angle. Forty‐two hours after irradiation, the gel phantom was scanned in a 1.5 Tesla MRI, and images were fused with the patient computed tomography data/structure set for further analysis of spatial dose distribution. RESULTS: Discrepancies between the CRAD Catalyst HD system and Brainlab Exactrac were <1 mm in the translational direction and <0.5° in the angular direction at noncoplanar couch angles. Dose parameters (D (Mean%) (,) D (95%)) and 3D gamma index passing rates were evaluated for both setup modalities for each planned target volume (PTV) at a variety of thresholds: 3%/2 mm (Exactrac≥93.1% and CRAD ≥87.2%), 5%/2 mm (Exactrac≥95.6% and CRAD ≥94.6%), and 5%/1 mm (Exactrac≥81.8% and CRAD ≥83.7%). CONCLUSION: Dose metrics for a setup with surface imaging was found to be consistent with setup using x‐ray imaging, demonstrating high accuracy and reproducibility for treatment delivery. Results indicate the feasibility of using surface imaging for position verification at noncoplanar couch angles for single‐isocenter, multiple‐target SRS using end‐to‐end quality assurance (QA) testing with 3D polymer gel dosimetry.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9121024
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91210242022-05-21 End to end comparison of surface‐guided imaging versus stereoscopic X‐rays for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3D anthropomorphic gel phantoms Bry, Victoria Saenz, Daniel Pappas, Evangelos Kalaitzakis, Georgios Papanikolaou, Nikos Rasmussen, Karl J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics INTRODUCTION: Two end‐to‐end tests evaluate the accuracy of a surface‐guided radiation therapy (SGRT) system (CRAD Catalyst HD) for position verification in comparison to a stereoscopic x‐ray imaging system (Brainlab Exactrac ) for single‐isocenter, multiple metastases stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) using 3D polymer gel inserts. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 3D‐printed phantom (Prime phantom, RTsafe PC, Athens, Greece) with two separate cylindrical polymer gel inserts were immobilized in open‐face masks and treated with a single isocentric, multitarget SRS plan. Planning was done in Brainlab (Elements) to treat five metastatic lesions in one fraction, and initial setup was done using cone beam computed tomography. Positional verification was done using orthogonal X‐ray imaging (Brainlab Exactrac) and/or a surface imaging system (CRAD Catalyst HD, Uppsala, Sweden), and shift discrepancies were recorded for each couch angle. Forty‐two hours after irradiation, the gel phantom was scanned in a 1.5 Tesla MRI, and images were fused with the patient computed tomography data/structure set for further analysis of spatial dose distribution. RESULTS: Discrepancies between the CRAD Catalyst HD system and Brainlab Exactrac were <1 mm in the translational direction and <0.5° in the angular direction at noncoplanar couch angles. Dose parameters (D (Mean%) (,) D (95%)) and 3D gamma index passing rates were evaluated for both setup modalities for each planned target volume (PTV) at a variety of thresholds: 3%/2 mm (Exactrac≥93.1% and CRAD ≥87.2%), 5%/2 mm (Exactrac≥95.6% and CRAD ≥94.6%), and 5%/1 mm (Exactrac≥81.8% and CRAD ≥83.7%). CONCLUSION: Dose metrics for a setup with surface imaging was found to be consistent with setup using x‐ray imaging, demonstrating high accuracy and reproducibility for treatment delivery. Results indicate the feasibility of using surface imaging for position verification at noncoplanar couch angles for single‐isocenter, multiple‐target SRS using end‐to‐end quality assurance (QA) testing with 3D polymer gel dosimetry. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-03-24 /pmc/articles/PMC9121024/ /pubmed/35322526 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13576 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Bry, Victoria
Saenz, Daniel
Pappas, Evangelos
Kalaitzakis, Georgios
Papanikolaou, Nikos
Rasmussen, Karl
End to end comparison of surface‐guided imaging versus stereoscopic X‐rays for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3D anthropomorphic gel phantoms
title End to end comparison of surface‐guided imaging versus stereoscopic X‐rays for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3D anthropomorphic gel phantoms
title_full End to end comparison of surface‐guided imaging versus stereoscopic X‐rays for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3D anthropomorphic gel phantoms
title_fullStr End to end comparison of surface‐guided imaging versus stereoscopic X‐rays for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3D anthropomorphic gel phantoms
title_full_unstemmed End to end comparison of surface‐guided imaging versus stereoscopic X‐rays for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3D anthropomorphic gel phantoms
title_short End to end comparison of surface‐guided imaging versus stereoscopic X‐rays for the SRS treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3D anthropomorphic gel phantoms
title_sort end to end comparison of surface‐guided imaging versus stereoscopic x‐rays for the srs treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocenter using 3d anthropomorphic gel phantoms
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9121024/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35322526
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13576
work_keys_str_mv AT bryvictoria endtoendcomparisonofsurfaceguidedimagingversusstereoscopicxraysforthesrstreatmentofmultiplemetastaseswithasingleisocenterusing3danthropomorphicgelphantoms
AT saenzdaniel endtoendcomparisonofsurfaceguidedimagingversusstereoscopicxraysforthesrstreatmentofmultiplemetastaseswithasingleisocenterusing3danthropomorphicgelphantoms
AT pappasevangelos endtoendcomparisonofsurfaceguidedimagingversusstereoscopicxraysforthesrstreatmentofmultiplemetastaseswithasingleisocenterusing3danthropomorphicgelphantoms
AT kalaitzakisgeorgios endtoendcomparisonofsurfaceguidedimagingversusstereoscopicxraysforthesrstreatmentofmultiplemetastaseswithasingleisocenterusing3danthropomorphicgelphantoms
AT papanikolaounikos endtoendcomparisonofsurfaceguidedimagingversusstereoscopicxraysforthesrstreatmentofmultiplemetastaseswithasingleisocenterusing3danthropomorphicgelphantoms
AT rasmussenkarl endtoendcomparisonofsurfaceguidedimagingversusstereoscopicxraysforthesrstreatmentofmultiplemetastaseswithasingleisocenterusing3danthropomorphicgelphantoms