A comparison between two different immobilization devices for radiation therapy treatment of pelvic cancer using VMAT |
| |
Authors: | Zaheeda Mulla Rania M. Hashem Abdullah Almohamad Tarik Boubakra Hussain Almerdhemah Anila Kunjappan Zayd Jastaniah |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. Department of Oncology, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, P.O Box 40047, 21499 Jeddah, Saudi Arabia;2. Department of Radiology, King Abdulaziz University Hospital, P.O Box 21589, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia;1. Laboratoire de Biophysique et Imagerie médicale, Université de Lomé, 01 BP 1515 Lomé 01, Togo;2. Service de Radiologie et Imagerie médicale, CHU Campus de Lomé, 03 BP 30284, Togo |
| |
Abstract: | ObjectivesTo assess setup reproducibility of low kneefix with feetfix (LKF-FF) system and its operator-reported convenience by reference to low dual leg positioner (LDLP), among patients treated with pelvic radiotherapy.MethodsA retrospective controlled trial was carried out at the radiotherapy unit. It included patients who underwent radical radiotherapy to the pelvis using VMAT, and who benefitted from LDLP (N = 30) or LKF-FF (N = 30) immobilization system. Average absolute shifts (AAS) and total vector errors (TVE) were computed and compared between the two systems, using translational (lateral, longitudinal and vertical) and rotational (X, Y and Z planes) directions. Accuracy rates were computed on pooled data including 1529 VMAT images, 819 in LDLP and 710 in LKF-FF groups, using different cutoffs. Radiotherapists' subjective assessment of the device's ease of setup, handling, cleaning, and storage, and patient comfort was carried out comparatively between the two devices.ResultsNo statistically significant difference was observed between the two systems in systematic settings, while LKF-FF outperformed LDLP in random settings; notably in vertical translation and X and Z rotational shifts. Analysis of TVEs showed significant decrease in rotational TVE in LKF-FF group (mean=1.38° versus 2.38, p = 0.003) by reference to LDLP, respectively; however, both systems had comparable translational TVE (p = 0.590). In pooled analysis, LKF-FF enabled an overall increase in setup accuracy rates in rotational directions by up to 15% and 19% at ±1° and ±2° accuracy levels, respectively (p<0.05). Subjective assessments showed that the two immobilization systems were comparable regarding all investigated dimensions; however, the overall radiotherapists’ preference leaned toward LDLP.ConclusionThe newly implemented LKF-FF system outperformed LDLP in terms of setup reproducibility, notably in rotational directions, where it enhanced setup accuracy rates by up to 19%. Long-term use of LKF-FF may improve the users’ satisfaction. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|