Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Evaluation of accuracy and reproducibility of a relocatable maxillary fixation system for fractionated intracranial stereotactic radiation therapy

      research-article
      , BAppSc 1 , , , PhD, FIR 2 , , PhD 3 , , BMSc 1 , , MBBS (Hons) FRANZCR 1 , 4
      Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences
      John Wiley and Sons Inc.
      Intracranial, radiotherapy, stereotactic

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Accurate localisation is an essential component for the delivery of intracranial stereotactic treatment. For fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy, we compared the daily localisation accuracy of a standard thermoplastic mask with a new maxillary fixation device ( MFD).

          Methods

          Daily pre‐treatment kV cone‐beam computed tomography ( CBCT) scans of 23 patients (12 localised in the MFD and 11 in the mask) with benign skull‐based lesions were reviewed retrospectively. The set up accuracy was measured in 6° of freedom, to ascertain both individual and population random and systematic errors. The appropriate clinical target volume to planning target volume margin was computed from set up error data.

          Results

          A total of 682 CBCT scans were evaluated. Systematic ( Σ) and random ( σ) population errors were Σ = 0.8 mm, 0.2 mm and 0.2 mm and σ = 0.3 mm, 0.3 mm and 0.2 mm, respectively, for the standard mask in the left/right ( LR), superior/inferior ( SI), and anterior/posterior ( AP) translational planes, and Σ = 0.2 mm, 0.1 mm and 0.2 mm and σ = 0.2 mm, 0.3 mm and 0.2 mm, respectively, for the MFD. There was a reduction in rotation errors in the MFD compared to the mask. Margin calculations suggested an isotropic margin could be safely reduced to 2 mm for the MFD.

          Conclusion

          The two devices demonstrate similar daily positional accuracy for fractionated stereotactic treatment of intracranial lesions. Combined with daily image guidance and couch correction, either of these devices is a viable frameless option for fractionated stereotactic radiation therapy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Inter- and intrafraction patient positioning uncertainties for intracranial radiotherapy: a study of four frameless, thermoplastic mask-based immobilization strategies using daily cone-beam CT.

          To determine whether frameless thermoplastic mask-based immobilization is adequate for image-guided cranial radiosurgery. Cone-beam CT localization data from patients with intracranial tumors were studied using daily pre- and posttreatment scans. The systems studied were (1) Type-S IMRT (head only) mask (Civco) with head cushion; (2) Uni-Frame mask (Civco) with head cushion, coupled with a BlueBag body immobilizer (Medical Intelligence); (3) Type-S head and shoulder mask with head and shoulder cushion (Civco); (4) same as previous, coupled with a mouthpiece. The comparative metrics were translational shift magnitude and average rotation angle; systematic inter-, random inter-, and random intrafraction positioning error was computed. For strategies 1-4, respectively, the analysis for interfraction variability included data from 20, 9, 81, and 11 patients, whereas that for intrafraction variability included a subset of 7, 9, 16, and 8 patients. The results were compared for statistical significance using an analysis of variance test. Immobilization system 4 provided the best overall accuracy and stability. The mean interfraction translational shifts (± SD) were 2.3 (± 1.4), 2.2 (± 1.1), 2.7 (± 1.5), and 2.1 (± 1.0) mm whereas intrafraction motion was 1.1 (± 1.2), 1.1 (± 1.1), 0.7 (± 0.9), and 0.7 (± 0.8) mm for devices 1-4, respectively. No significant correlation between intrafraction motion and treatment time was evident, although intrafraction motion was not purely random. We find that all frameless thermoplastic mask systems studied are viable solutions for image-guided intracranial radiosurgery. With daily pretreatment corrections, symmetric PTV margins of 1 mm would likely be adequate if ideal radiation planning and targeting systems were available. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Frameless linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases: analysis of patient repositioning using a mask fixation system and clinical outcomes

            Purpose To assess the accuracy of patient repositioning and clinical outcomes of frameless stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases using a stereotactic mask fixation system. Patients and Methods One hundred two patients treated consecutively with frameless SRS as primary treatment at University of Rome Sapienza Sant'Andrea Hospital between October 2008 and April 2010 and followed prospectively were involved in the study. A commercial stereotactic mask fixation system (BrainLab) was used for patient immobilization. A computerized tomography (CT) scan obtained immediately before SRS was used to evaluate the accuracy of patient repositioning in the mask by comparing the isocenter position to the isocenter position established in the planning CT. Deviations of isocenter coordinates in each direction and 3D displacement were calculated. Overall survival, brain control, and local control were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method calculated from the time of SRS. Results The mean measured isocenter displacements were 0.12 mm (SD 0.35 mm) in the lateral direction, 0.2 mm (SD 0.4 mm) in the anteroposterior, and 0.4 mm (SD 0.6 mm) in craniocaudal direction. The maximum displacement of 2.1 mm was seen in craniocaudal direction. The mean 3D displacement was 0.5 mm (SD 0.7 mm), being maximum 2.9 mm. The median survival was 15.5 months, and 1-year and 2-year survival rates were 58% and 24%, respectively. Nine patients recurred locally after SRS, with 1-year and 2-year local control rates of 91% and 82%, respectively. Stable extracranial disease (P = 0.001) and KPS > 70 (P = 0.01) were independent predictors of survival. Conclusions Frameless SRS is an effective treatment in the management of patients with brain metastases. The presented non-invasive mask-based fixation stereotactic system is associated with a high degree of patient repositioning accuracy; however, a careful evaluation is essential since occasional errors up to 3 mm may occur.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Adjuvant therapy for unresectable meningiomas: benign and malignant.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Med Radiat Sci
                J Med Radiat Sci
                10.1002/(ISSN)2051-3909
                JMRS
                Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                2051-3895
                2051-3909
                22 September 2015
                March 2016
                : 63
                : 1 ( doiID: 10.1111/jmrs.2016.63.issue-1 )
                : 41-47
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Department of Radiation OncologyPrincess Alexandra Hospital Brisbane QueenslandAustralia
                [ 2 ] Radiation Oncology Mater CentrePrincess Alexandra Hospital South Brisbane QueenslandAustralia
                [ 3 ] QFAB BioinformaticsInstitute for Molecular Bioscience University of Queensland Brisbane QueenslandAustralia
                [ 4 ] School of MedicineUniversity of Queensland Brisbane QueenslandAustralia
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence

                Majella Russo, Department of Radiation Oncology, Ground Floor F Princess Alexandra Hospital, 199 Ipswich Road, Woolloongabba 4102, Queensland, Australia. Tel: +61 7 3176 6568; Fax: +61 7 3176 6127; E‐mail: majella.russo@ 123456health.qld.gov.au

                Article
                JMRS142
                10.1002/jmrs.142
                4775825
                27087974
                60fb3d13-6f6b-4feb-b498-a3f5820d9e24
                © 2015 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd on behalf of Australian Institute of Radiography and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 10 February 2015
                : 24 June 2015
                : 16 August 2015
                Page count
                Pages: 7
                Categories
                Original Article
                Original Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                jmrs142
                March 2016
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:4.7.6 mode:remove_FC converted:03.03.2016

                intracranial,radiotherapy,stereotactic
                intracranial, radiotherapy, stereotactic

                Comments

                Comment on this article