Simulation of intrafraction motion and overall geometric accuracy of a frameless intracranial radiosurgery process

Feygelman, Vladimir; Walker, Luke; Chinnaiyan, Prakash; Forster, Kenneth

doi:10.1120/jacmp.v9i4.2828

Cited by 31 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies compared these two systems and concluded they had similar accuracy (6,7) . These advances considerably increased the setup precision, and allowed the use of different types of frameless masks with a comparable accuracy to that of the invasive frame approach (8‐13) …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of volumetric‐modulated arc therapy and dynamic conformal arc treatment planning for cranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Molinier¹,

Kerr²,

Simeon³

et al. 2016

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim was to analyze arc therapy techniques according to the number and position of the brain lesions reported by comparing dynamic noncoplanar conformal arcs (DCA), two coplanar full arcs (RAC) with volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT), multiple noncoplanar partial arcs with VMAT (RANC), and two full arcs with VMAT and 10° table rotation (RAT). Patients with a single lesion (n = 10), multiple lesions (n = 10) or a single lesion close to organs at risk (n = 5) and previously treated with DCA were selected. For each patient, the DCA treatment was replanned with all VMAT techniques. All DCA plans were compared with VMAT plans and evaluated in regard to the different quality indices and dosimetric parameters. For single lesion, homogeneity index (HI) better results were found for the RANC technique (0.17±0.05) compared with DCA procedure (0.27±0.05). Concerning conformity index (CI), the RAT technique gave higher and better values (0.85±0.04) compared with those obtained with the DCA technique (0.77±0.05). DCA improved healthy brain protection (8.35±5.61 cc vs. 10.52±6.40 cc for RANC) and reduced monitor unit numbers (3046±374 MU vs. 4651±736 for RANC), even if global room occupation was higher. For multiple lesions, VMAT techniques provided better HI (0.16) than DCA (0.24±0.07). The CI was improved with RAT (0.8±0.08 for RAT vs. 0.71±0.08 for DCA). The normalV10Gy healthy brain was better protected with DCA (9.27±4.57 cc). Regarding the MU numbers: RANC

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of volumetric‐modulated arc therapy and dynamic conformal arc treatment planning for cranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Molinier¹,

Kerr²,

Simeon³

et al. 2016

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The accuracy and precision of frameless mask systems for inter‐ and intrafraction motion has been studied extensively in humans but there is limited information regarding their use in veterinary medicine . In a comparison study of frame‐based versus frameless systems using Brainlab equipment, the setup accuracy of the frameless system was shown to be comparable to the frame‐based system .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inter‐ and Intrafraction Motion for Stereotactic Radiosurgery in Dogs and Cats Using a Modified Brainlab Frameless Stereotactic Mask System

Dieterich

Zwingenberger

Hansen

et al. 2015

Vet Radiology Ultrasound

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Precise and accurate patient positioning is necessary when doing stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to ensure adequate dosing to the tumor and sparing of normal tissues. This prospective cross-sectional study aimed to assess feasibility of a commercially available modified frameless SRS positioning system for use in veterinary radiotherapy patients with brain tumors. Fifty-one dogs and 12 cats were enrolled. Baseline and verification CT images were acquired. The verification CT images from 32 dogs and five cats had sufficient images for fusion to baseline CT images. A rigid box-based fusion was performed to determine interfraction motion. Forty-eight dogs and 11 cats were assessed for intrafraction motion by cine CT. Seventy percent of dogs and 60% of cats had interfraction 3D vector translational shifts >1 mm, with mean values of 1.9 mm in dogs, and 1.8 mm in cats. In dogs muscle wasting was weakly correlated with translational shifts. The maximum angular interfraction motion observed was 6.3° (roll), 3.5° (pitch), and 3.3° (yaw). There was no correlation between angular interfraction motion and weight, brachycephaly, or muscle wasting. Fifty-seven percent of dogs and 50% of cats had respiration-related intrafraction motion. Of these, 4.5% of dogs and 10% of cats had intrafraction motion >1 mm. This study demonstrates the modified Brainlab system is feasible for SRS in dogs and cats. The smaller cranial size and difference in anatomy increases setup uncertainty in some animals beyond limits usually accepted in SRS. Image-guided positioning is recommended to achieve clinically acceptable setup accuracy (<1 mm) for SRS.

show abstract

“…( 4 ) The geometric accuracy of the 6D robotic couch system has been studied previously and it was found that the overall system accuracy was around

0.31 \pm 0.77 mm

range. ( 5 , 6 ) Intrafraction setup variability by X‐ray system for hypofractionated cranial and body radiotherapy has been investigated, and the motion range for abdomen was

1.3 \pm 1.2 mm

( 7 ) and

1.19 \pm 0.45 mm

for the frame‐based technique. ( 8 )…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Study of ExacTrac X‐ray 6D IGRT setup uncertainty for marker‐based prostate IMRT treatment

Shi

Tazi

Fang

et al. 2012

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Novalis Tx ExacTrac X‐ray system has the 6D adjustment ability for patient setup. Limited studies exist about the setup uncertainty with ExacTrac X‐ray system for IMRT prostate treatment with fiducial markers implanted. The purpose of this study is to investigate the marker‐based prostate IMRT treatment setup uncertainty using ExacTrac 6D IGRT ability for patient setup. Forty‐three patients with prostate cancers and markers implanted have been treated on the Novalis Tx machine. The ExacTrac X‐ray system has been used for the patient pretreatment setup and intratreatment verification. In total, the shifts data for 1261 fractions and 3504 correction times (the numbers of X‐ray images were taken from tube 1 and tube 2) have been analyzed. The setup uncertainty has been separated into uncertainties in 6D. Marker matching uncertainty was also analyzed. Correction frequency probability density function was plotted, and the radiation dose for imaging was calculated. The minimum, average, and maximum translation shifts were: −5.12±3.89 mm, 0.20±2.21 mm, and 6.07±4.44 mm, respectively, in the lateral direction; −6.80±3.21 mm, −1.09±2.21 mm, and 3.12±2.62 mm, respectively, in the longitudinal direction; and −7.33±3.46 mm, −0.93±2.70 mm, and 5.93±4.85 mm, respectively, in the vertical direction. The minimum, average, and maximum rotation shifts were: −1.23° ± 1.95°, −0.25° ± 1.30°, and −2.38° ± 2.91°, respectively, along lateral direction; −0.67° ± 0.91°, −0.10° ± 0.61°, and −1.51° ± 2.04°, respectively, along longitudinal direction; and −0.75° ± 1.01°, −0.02° ± 0.50°, and −0.82° ± 1.13°, respectively, along vertical direction. On average, each patient had three correction times during one fraction treatment. The radiation dose is about 3 mSv per fraction. With the ExacTrac 6D X‐ray system, the prostate IMRT treatment with marker implanted can achieve less than 2 mm setup uncertainty in translations, and less than 0.25° in rotations as overall interfraction mean error. The imaging dose is less than kV (CBCT) for setup verification.PACS number: 87.55.km, 87.55.Qr, 87.56.bd

show abstract

Simulation of intrafraction motion and overall geometric accuracy of a frameless intracranial radiosurgery process

Cited by 31 publications

References 43 publications

Comparison of volumetric‐modulated arc therapy and dynamic conformal arc treatment planning for cranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Comparison of volumetric‐modulated arc therapy and dynamic conformal arc treatment planning for cranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Inter‐ and Intrafraction Motion for Stereotactic Radiosurgery in Dogs and Cats Using a Modified Brainlab Frameless Stereotactic Mask System

Study of ExacTrac X‐ray 6D IGRT setup uncertainty for marker‐based prostate IMRT treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About