Comparison of surface matching and target matching for image-guided pelvic radiation therapy for both supine and prone patient positions

Persistent Link:
http://hdl.handle.net/10150/617402
Title:
Comparison of surface matching and target matching for image-guided pelvic radiation therapy for both supine and prone patient positions
Author:
Zhao, Hui; Wang, Brian; Sarkar, Vikren; Rassiah-Szegedi, Prema; Huang, Y. Jessica; Szegedi, Martin; Huang, Long; Gonzalez, Victor; Salter, Bill
Affiliation:
Univ Arizona, Dept Radiat Oncol, Ctr Canc
Issue Date:
2016-05
Publisher:
MULTIMED INC
Citation:
ZHAO, Hui et al. Comparison of surface matching and target matching for image-guided pelvic radiation therapy for both supine and prone patient positions. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, [S.l.], v. 17, n. 3, may. 2016. ISSN 15269914. Available at: <http://www.jacmp.org/index.php/jacmp/article/view/5611>. doi:10.1120/jacmp.v17i3.5611.
Journal:
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS
Rights:
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. .
Collection Information:
This item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.
Abstract:
We investigate the difference between surface matching and target matching for pelvic radiation image guidance. The uniqueness of our study is that all patients have multiple CT-on-rails (CTOR) scans to compare to corresponding AlignRT images. Ten patients receiving pelvic radiation were enrolled in this study. Two simulation CT scans were performed in supine and prone positions for each patient. Body surface contours were generated in treatment planning system and exported to AlignRT to serve as reference images. During treatment day, the patient was aligned to treatment isocenter with room lasers, and then scanned with both CTOR and AlignRT. Image-guidance shifts were calculated for both modalities by comparison to the simulation CT and the differences between them were analyzed for both supine and prone positions, respectively. These procedures were performed for each patient once per week for five weeks. The difference of patient displacement between AlignRT and CTOR was analyzed. For supine position, five patients had an average difference of displacement between AlignRT and CTOR along any direction (vertical, longitudinal, and lateral) greater than 0.5 cm, and one patient greater than 1 cm. Four patients had a maximum difference greater than 1 cm. For prone position, seven patients had an average difference greater than 0.5 cm, and three patients greater than 1 cm. Nine patients had a maximum difference greater than 1 cm. The difference of displacement between AlignRT and CTOR was greater for the prone position than for the supine position. For the patients studied here, surface matching does not appear to be an advisable image-guidance approach for pelvic radiation therapy for patients with either supine or prone position. There appears to be a potential for large alignment discrepancies (up to 2.25 cm) between surface matching and target matching.
Note:
Open access.
DOI:
10.1120/jacmp.v17i3.5611
Keywords:
AlignRT; CT-on-rails; supine; prone
Series/Report no.:
IGRT
Version:
Final published version
Additional Links:
http://www.jacmp.org/index.php/jacmp/article/view/5611

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.contributor.authorZhao, Huien
dc.contributor.authorWang, Brianen
dc.contributor.authorSarkar, Vikrenen
dc.contributor.authorRassiah-Szegedi, Premaen
dc.contributor.authorHuang, Y. Jessicaen
dc.contributor.authorSzegedi, Martinen
dc.contributor.authorHuang, Longen
dc.contributor.authorGonzalez, Victoren
dc.contributor.authorSalter, Billen
dc.date.accessioned2016-07-23T00:18:38Z-
dc.date.available2016-07-23T00:18:38Z-
dc.date.issued2016-05-
dc.identifier.citationZHAO, Hui et al. Comparison of surface matching and target matching for image-guided pelvic radiation therapy for both supine and prone patient positions. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, [S.l.], v. 17, n. 3, may. 2016. ISSN 15269914. Available at: <http://www.jacmp.org/index.php/jacmp/article/view/5611>. doi:10.1120/jacmp.v17i3.5611.en
dc.identifier.doi10.1120/jacmp.v17i3.5611-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/617402-
dc.description.abstractWe investigate the difference between surface matching and target matching for pelvic radiation image guidance. The uniqueness of our study is that all patients have multiple CT-on-rails (CTOR) scans to compare to corresponding AlignRT images. Ten patients receiving pelvic radiation were enrolled in this study. Two simulation CT scans were performed in supine and prone positions for each patient. Body surface contours were generated in treatment planning system and exported to AlignRT to serve as reference images. During treatment day, the patient was aligned to treatment isocenter with room lasers, and then scanned with both CTOR and AlignRT. Image-guidance shifts were calculated for both modalities by comparison to the simulation CT and the differences between them were analyzed for both supine and prone positions, respectively. These procedures were performed for each patient once per week for five weeks. The difference of patient displacement between AlignRT and CTOR was analyzed. For supine position, five patients had an average difference of displacement between AlignRT and CTOR along any direction (vertical, longitudinal, and lateral) greater than 0.5 cm, and one patient greater than 1 cm. Four patients had a maximum difference greater than 1 cm. For prone position, seven patients had an average difference greater than 0.5 cm, and three patients greater than 1 cm. Nine patients had a maximum difference greater than 1 cm. The difference of displacement between AlignRT and CTOR was greater for the prone position than for the supine position. For the patients studied here, surface matching does not appear to be an advisable image-guidance approach for pelvic radiation therapy for patients with either supine or prone position. There appears to be a potential for large alignment discrepancies (up to 2.25 cm) between surface matching and target matching.en
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherMULTIMED INCen
dc.relation.ispartofseriesIGRTen
dc.relation.urlhttp://www.jacmp.org/index.php/jacmp/article/view/5611en
dc.rightsThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. .en
dc.subjectAlignRTen
dc.subjectCT-on-railsen
dc.subjectsupineen
dc.subjectproneen
dc.titleComparison of surface matching and target matching for image-guided pelvic radiation therapy for both supine and prone patient positionsen
dc.typeArticleen
dc.contributor.departmentUniv Arizona, Dept Radiat Oncol, Ctr Cancen
dc.identifier.journalJOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICSen
dc.description.noteOpen access.en
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item from the UA Faculty Publications collection is made available by the University of Arizona with support from the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact us at repository@u.library.arizona.edu.en
dc.eprint.versionFinal published versionen
All Items in UA Campus Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.