Cone beam CT verification of mask based immobilization of stereotactic radiotherapy treatments
PO-1834
Abstract
Cone beam CT verification of mask based immobilization of stereotactic radiotherapy treatments
Authors: Judit Papp1,2, Mihály Simon1,2, Emese Csiki1, Árpád Kovács1,2
1University of Debrecen, Clinic of Oncoradiology, Debrecen, Hungary; 2University of Pécs, Faculty of Health Sciences, Doctoral School of Health Sciences, Pécs, Hungary
Show Affiliations
Hide Affiliations
Purpose or Objective
Brain metastases (BM) are considered a serious
problem regarding the nature of oncological diseases. Radiotherapy, either
alone or after surgery, remains the mainstay of treatment for brain metastases.
Whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT), stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and
stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) could be an option. SRT can be performed with
Gamma knife, Cyberknife, tomotherapy and linear accelerator. Modern linear
accelerators with integrated image guided radiotherapy (IGRT) solutions such as
cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) enabled the extensive use of SRT in the
management of BMs. The aim of our work is to demonstrate the role of image
guidance and volumetric imaging in stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) of brain
metastases.
Material and Methods
Between 2018 and 2020, 106 patients underwent
intracranial stereotactic radiotherapy. 10 patients with metastatic brain tumors
treated with SRT were randomly selected and included in our study model.
Patients were scanned pre- and post-treatment with cone beam CT. This is used
to determine the translational and rotational deviations. Rotation values can
be corrected up to 2.9°, and for values above 3° the patient must be
repositioned. Translational values are corrected to 10 mm, above that the
patient needs to be repositioned. Immediately post-treatment, another HR 3D
CBCT is performed to assess the intra-fractional displacements. Total of 100
verifications of 50 stereotactic treatments were performed and analyzed.
Results
Our analysis compared the results of 50 pre-treatment
and 50 post-treatment verification CBCT measurements in 10 patients. Population
mean X, Y, Z values were -0.13 cm, -0.04 cm, -0.03 cm, respectively, rotation
values 0.81°, 0.51°, 0.46°, respectively. Systematic error components for
translational displacements pre corrections were as follows: 0.14 cm for X,
0.13 cm for Y and 0.1 cm for Z. Systematic error components of the
post-treatment HR 3D CBCTs were as follows: 0.01 cm for X, 0.06 cm for Y and
0.04 cm for Z.
Conclusion
Frameless immobilization allows fractionation of the
treatments but requires a very high degree of accuracy and reproducibility in
patient positioning. In our study we evaluated the patient positioning and
inter-fractional accuracy of our frameless system. Population mean values close
to 0 confirmed that there is no systematic variation in our system and the
accuracy of our equipment and tools is reliable. HR 3D CBCT scans performed pre
SRTs further refine patient and target volume setting, support medical decision
making and eliminate the possibility of gross error.