کد مقاله کد نشریه سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی نسخه تمام متن
1884771 1043367 2016 5 صفحه PDF دانلود رایگان
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله ISI
Couch height-based patient setup for abdominal radiation therapy
ترجمه فارسی عنوان
تنظیم بیمار مبتنی بر نیمکت ارتفاع برای پرتودرمانی شکم
کلمات کلیدی
نیمکت، علامت پوست، سرطان شکم، برپایی،
موضوعات مرتبط
مهندسی و علوم پایه فیزیک و نجوم تشعشع
چکیده انگلیسی
There are 2 methods commonly used for patient positioning in the anterior-posterior (A-P) direction: one is the skin mark patient setup method (SMPS) and the other is the couch height-based patient setup method (CHPS). This study compared the setup accuracy of these 2 methods for abdominal radiation therapy. The enrollment for this study comprised 23 patients with pancreatic cancer. For treatments (539 sessions), patients were set up by using isocenter skin marks and thereafter treatment couch was shifted so that the distance between the isocenter and the upper side of the treatment couch was equal to that indicated on the computed tomographic (CT) image. Setup deviation in the A-P direction for CHPS was measured by matching the spine of the digitally reconstructed radiograph (DRR) of a lateral beam at simulation with that of the corresponding time-integrated electronic portal image. For SMPS with no correction (SMPS/NC), setup deviation was calculated based on the couch-level difference between SMPS and CHPS. SMPS/NC was corrected using 2 off-line correction protocols: no action level (SMPS/NAL) and extended NAL (SMPS/eNAL) protocols. Margins to compensate for deviations were calculated using the Stroom formula. A-P deviation > 5 mm was observed in 17% of SMPS/NC, 4% of SMPS/NAL, and 4% of SMPS/eNAL sessions but only in one CHPS session. For SMPS/NC, 7 patients (30%) showed deviations at an increasing rate of > 0.1 mm/fraction, but for CHPS, no such trend was observed. The standard deviations (SDs) of systematic error (Σ) were 2.6, 1.4, 0.6, and 0.8 mm and the root mean squares of random error (σ) were 2.1, 2.6, 2.7, and 0.9 mm for SMPS/NC, SMPS/NAL, SMPS/eNAL, and CHPS, respectively. Margins to compensate for the deviations were wide for SMPS/NC (6.7 mm), smaller for SMPS/NAL (4.6 mm) and SMPS/eNAL (3.1 mm), and smallest for CHPS (2.2 mm). Achieving better setup with smaller margins, CHPS appears to be a reproducible method for abdominal patient setup.
ناشر
Database: Elsevier - ScienceDirect (ساینس دایرکت)
Journal: Medical Dosimetry - Volume 41, Issue 1, Spring 2016, Pages 59-63
نویسندگان
, , , , , , , , , , , , ,