PubMed · 10303956
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
R Getz. 1989. Understanding the feasibility study.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10303956/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
PURPOSE: To determine in which treatment sites field-only hard copy electronic portal images (EPI) captured during a treatment exposure could replace traditional double exposed port films in a busy radiation oncology department. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The three linear accelerators in the William Buckland Radiotherapy Centre (WBRC) at the Alfred Hospital in Melbourne are each equipped with an electronic portal imaging device (EPID). These devices can be used daily on all patients where the treatment fields are within the size constraint of the cassette, for example, less than 25 x 25 cm. Port films using radiographic film in hard cassettes were previously considered the standard method of field placement verification. After the radiation therapists were trained in all program aspects of capturing, enhancing, and producing hard copies of EPIs, a study was developed to evaluate the possibility of replacing port films with EPI hard copies within the established departmental procedures. Comparison of EPI hard copy with the simulator film and the port film of the same field was carried out by the radiation oncologist specialists. Seventy-eight comparison sets were generated and grouped into seven anatomical regions for evaluation by the radiation oncologist specialist responsible for each particular region. The outcome decision was the preferred imaging option. Where no preference was stated, EPI became the modality of choice, as it increased the efficiency of work practice. RESULTS: The results indicate that field-only EPI can be considered to be at least as clinically useful for treatment verification in the following sites: breast, chest, hip, spine, and large pelvic fields. Port films using a standard, double exposure technique were considered necessary for partial brain fields, small pelvis fields, extremities, and radical head and neck fields. CONCLUSION: The quality of field-only images captured using an EPID has been favorably assessed to be equivalent to, or an improvement on, the traditional double exposed port films for some treatment areas. Departmental policy has been altered to incorporate this new imaging modality as a practical alternative to port films, resulting in a direct benefit in terms of resource management and patient care. Continuing research is currently evaluating open area exposed EPI hard copies as a potential alternative to port films.
PURPOSE: For tumors in the thorax and abdomen, reducing the treatment margin for organ motion due to breathing reduces the volume of normal tissues that will be irradiated. A higher dose can be delivered to the target, provided that the risk of marginal misses is not increased. To ensure safe margin reduction, we investigated the feasibility of using active breathing control (ABC) to temporarily immobilize the patient's breathing. Treatment planning and delivery can then be performed at identical ABC conditions with minimal margin for breathing motion. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An ABC apparatus is constructed consisting of 2 pairs of flow monitor and scissor valve, 1 each to control the inspiration and expiration paths to the patient. The patient breathes through a mouth-piece connected to the ABC apparatus. The respiratory signal is processed continuously, using a personal computer that displays the changing lung volume in real-time. After the patient's breathing pattern becomes stable, the operator activates ABC at a preselected phase in the breathing cycle. Both valves are then closed to immobilize breathing motion. Breathing motion of 12 patients were held with ABC to examine their acceptance of the procedure. The feasibility of applying ABC for treatment was tested in 5 patients by acquiring volumetric scans with a spiral computed tomography (CT) scanner during active breath-hold. Two patients had Hodgkin's disease, 2 had metastatic liver cancer, and 1 had lung cancer. Two intrafraction ABC scans were acquired at the same respiratory phase near the end of normal or deep inspiration. An additional ABC scan near the end of normal expiration was acquired for 2 patients. The ABC scans were also repeated 1 week later for a Hodgkin's patient. In 1 liver patient, ABC scans were acquired at 7 different phases of the breathing cycle to facilitate examination of the liver motion associated with ventilation. Contours of the lungs and livers were outlined when applicable. The variation of the organ positions and volumes for the different scans were quantified and compared. RESULTS: The ABC procedure was well tolerated in the 12 patients. When ABC was applied near the end of normal expiration, the minimal duration of active breath-hold was 15 s for 1 patient with lung cancer, and 20 s or more for all other patients. The duration was greater than 40 s for 2 patients with Hodgkin's disease when ABC was applied during deep inspiration. Scan artifacts associated with normal breathing motion were not observed in the ABC scans. The analysis of the small set of intrafraction scan data indicated that with ABC, the liver volumes were reproducible at about 1%, and lung volumes to within 6 %. The excursions of a "center of target" parameter for the livers were less than 1 mm at the same respiratory phase, but were larger than 4 mm at the extremes of the breathing cycle. The inter-fraction scan study indicated that daily setup variation contributed to the uncertainty in assessing the reproducibility of organ immobilization with ABC between treatment fractions. CONCLUSION: The results were encouraging; ABC provides a simple means to minimize breathing motion. When applied for CT scanning and treatment, the ABC procedure requires no more than standard operation of the CT scanner or the medical accelerator. The ABC scans are void of motion artifacts commonly seen on fast spiral CT scans. When acquired at different points in the breathing cycle, these ABC scans show organ motion in three-dimension (3D) that can be used to enhance treatment planning. Reproducibility of organ immobilization with ABC throughout the course of treatment must be quantified before the procedure can be applied to reduce margin for conformal treatment.
PURPOSE: Daily CT localization has been demonstrated to be a precise method of correcting radiation field placement by reducing setup and organ motion variations to facilitate dose escalation in prostate carcinoma. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of daily ultrasound-guided localization utilizing daily CT as a standard. The relatively simple computer-assisted ultrasound-based system is designed to be an efficient means of achieving daily accuracy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: After five weeks of conformal external beam radiation therapy, 23 patients underwent a second CT simulation. Prostate-only fields based on this scan were created with no PTV margin. On each of the final conedown treatment days, a repeat CT simulation and isocenter comparison was performed. Ten of the above patients also underwent prostate localization with a newly developed ultrasound-based system (BAT) that is designed to facilitate patient positioning at the treatment machine. The portable system, which electronically imports the CT simulation target contours and isocenter, is situated adjacent to the treatment couch. Transverse and sagittal suprapubic ultrasound images are captured, and the system overlays the corresponding CT contours relative to the machine isocenter. The CT contours are maneuvered in three dimensions by a touch screen menu to match the ultrasound images. The system then displays the 3-D couch shifts required to produce field alignment. RESULTS: The BAT ultrasound system produced good quality images with minimal operator training required. The localization process was completed in less than 5 min. The absolute magnitude difference between CT and ultrasound was small (A/P range 0 to 5.9 mm, mean 3 mm +/- 1.8; Lat. range 0 to 7.9 mm, mean 2.4 mm +/- 1.8; S/I range 0 to 9 mm, mean 4.6 mm +/- 2.8). Analysis confirmed a significant correlation of isocenter shifts (A/P r = 0.66, p < 0.0001; Lat. r = 0.58, p < 0.003; S/I r = 0.78, p < 0.0001) in all dimensions, and linear regression confirmed the equivalence of the two modalities. CONCLUSIONS: Daily CT localization is a precise method to improve daily target localization in prostate carcinoma. However, it requires significant human and technical resources that limit its widespread applicability. Conversely, localization with the BAT ultrasound system is simple and expeditious by virtue of its ability to image the prostate at the treatment machine in the treatment position. Our initial evaluation revealed ultrasound targeting to be functionally equivalent to CT. This ultrasound technology is promising and warrants further investigation in more patients and at other anatomical sites.