Residual setup errors caused by rotation and non-rigid motion in prone-treated cervical cancer patients after online CBCT image-guidance
Radiotherapy & Oncology , Volume 103 - Issue 3 p. 322- 326
Purpose: To quantify the impact of uncorrected or partially corrected pelvis rotation and spine bending on region-specific residual setup errors in prone-treated cervical cancer patients. Methods and materials: Fifteen patients received an in-room CBCT scan twice a week. CBCT scans were registered to the planning CT-scan using a pelvic clip box and considering both translations and rotations. For daily correction of the detected translational pelvis setup errors by couch shifts, residual setup errors were determined for L5, L4 and seven other points of interest (POIs). The same was done for a procedure with translational corrections and limited rotational correction (±3°) by a 6D positioning device. Results: With translational correction only, residual setup errors were large especially for L5/L4 in AP direction (Σ = 5.1/5.5 mm). For the 7 POIs the residual setup errors ranged from 1.8 to 5.6 mm (AP). Using the 6D positioning device, the errors were substantially smaller (for L5/L4 in AP direction Σ = 2.7/2.2 mm). Using this device, the percentage of fractions with a residual AP displacement for L4 > 5 mm reduced from 47% to 9%. Conclusions: Setup variations caused by pelvis rotations are large and cannot be ignored in prone treatment of cervical cancer patients. Corrections with a 6D positioning device may considerably reduce resulting setup errors, but the residual setup errors should still be accounted for by appropriate CTV-to-PTV margins.
|Cervix cancer, Cone beam CT, IGRT, Non-rigid motion, Radiotherapy, Set up error|
|Radiotherapy & Oncology|
|Organisation||Department of Radiation Oncology|
Ahmad, R.B, Hoogeman, M.S, Quint, S, Mens, J.W.M, Vásquez Osorio, E.M, & Heijmen, B.J.M. (2012). Residual setup errors caused by rotation and non-rigid motion in prone-treated cervical cancer patients after online CBCT image-guidance. Radiotherapy & Oncology, 103(3), 322–326. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2012.04.013