基于射波刀Xsight spine prone tracking模式治疗脊柱肿瘤患者的摆位准确性分析

  目的  射波刀脊柱肿瘤治疗提供了两种追踪模式,即脊柱追踪系统（Xsight spine tracking,XST）和俯卧位脊柱追踪系统（Xsight spine prone tracking,XSPT）。本研究通过比较两种脊柱追踪模式的摆位误差,评估射波刀采用XSPT模式治疗脊柱肿瘤患者的摆位准确性。  方法  回顾性分析2020年7月至2021年6月在北京大学第三医院行射波刀治疗的腰骶脊柱肿瘤患者18例,分别采用仰卧位（真空垫固定）和俯卧位（热塑体网与俯卧板固定）进行CT模拟定位。按照XST与XSPT两种追踪方式设计治疗计划,治疗中分别记录两种体位脊柱追踪的摆位修正误差,平移修正为进出、左右、升降方向,角度修正为顺时针-逆时针旋转、仰俯、倾斜。同时采集俯卧位治疗模式下同步呼吸追踪的相关误差。两种追踪模式的摆位修正误差参数通过配对t检验方法进行分析,比较两组修正误差的差异。同时分析俯卧位同步呼吸相关误差,评估呼吸模型的预测准确性。  结果  升降方向仰卧位修正误差为（0.18±0.16）mm,俯卧位为（0.31±0.26）mm,差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）;进出方向仰卧位修正误差为（0.27±0.24）mm,俯卧位为（0.50±0.40）mm,差异具有统计学意义（P<0.05）。俯卧位呼吸模型相关误差左右、进出和升降的平均值分别为（0.21±0.11）mm、（0.41±0.38）mm和（0.68±0.42）mm。  结论  治疗中受呼吸运动的影响,相比于仰卧位定位方式,俯卧位在升降与进出方向摆位误差相对较大,但俯卧位治疗方式具有同步呼吸追踪系统,且该系统可以实现治疗过程中呼吸动度的实时修正。俯卧位脊柱追踪模式的一致性与准确性同样能够满足临床治疗需求。      

A comparison of ventilatory prostate movement in four treatment positions

PURPOSE: To ensure target coverage during radiotherapy, all sources of geometric uncertainty in target position must be considered. Movement of the prostate due to breathing has not traditionally been considered in prostate radiotherapy. The purpose of this study is to report the influence of patient orientation and immobilization on prostate movement due to breathing. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Four patients had radiopaque markers implanted in the prostate. Fluoroscopy was performed in four different positions: prone in alpha cradle, prone with an aquaplast mold, supine on a flat table, and supine with a false table under the buttocks. Fluoroscopic movies were videotaped and digitized. Frames were analyzed using 2D-alignment software to determine the extent of movement of the prostate markers and the skeleton for each position during normal and deep breathing. RESULTS: During normal breathing, maximal movement of the prostate markers was seen in the prone position (cranial-caudal [CC] range: 0.9-5.1 mm; anterior-posterior [AP] range: up to 3.5 mm). In the supine position, prostate movement during normal breathing was less than 1 mm in all directions. Deep breathing resulted in CC movements of 3.8-10.5 mm in the prone position (with and without an aquaplast mold). This range was reduced to 2.0-7.3 mm in the supine position and 0.5-2.1 mm with the use of the false table top. Deep breathing resulted in AP skeletal movements of 2.7-13.1 mm in the prone position, whereas AP skeletal movements in the supine position were negligible. CONCLUSION: Ventilatory movement of the prostate is substantial in the prone position and is reduced in the supine position. The potential for breathing to influence prostate movement, and thus the dose delivered to the prostate and normal tissues, should be considered when positioning and planning patients for conformal irradiation.     

Influence of intrafraction motion on margins for prostate radiotherapy

PURPOSE: To assess the impact of intrafraction intervention on margins for prostate radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eleven supine prostate patients with three implanted transponders were studied. The relative transponder positions were monitored for 8 min and combined with previously measured data on prostate position relative to skin marks. Margins were determined for situations of (1) skin-based positioning, and (2) pretreatment transponder positioning. Intratreatment intervention was simulated assuming conditions of (1) continuous tracking, and (2) a 3-mm threshold for position correction. RESULTS: For skin-based setup without and with inclusion of intrafraction motion, prostate treatments would have required average margins of 8.0, 7.3, and 10.0 mm and 8.2, 10.2, and 12.5 mm, about the left-right, anterior-posterior, and cranial-caudal directions, respectively. Positioning by prostate markers at the start of the treatment fraction reduced these values to 1.8, 5.8, and 7.1 mm, respectively. Interbeam adjustment further reduced margins to an average of 1.4, 2.3, and 1.8 mm. Intrabeam adjustment yielded margins of 1.3, 1.5, and 1.5 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: Significant reductions in margins might be achieved by repositioning the patient before each beam, either radiographically or electromagnetically. However, 2 of the 11 patients would have benefited from continuous target tracking and threshold-based intervention.     

A randomized trial of supine vs. prone positioning in patients undergoing escalated dose conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The optimal treatment position for patients receiving radical radiation therapy for prostate cancer has been a source of controversy. To resolve this issue, we conducted a randomized trial to evaluate the effects of supine and prone positioning on organ motion, positioning errors, and dose to critical organs during escalated dose conformal irradiation for localized prostate cancer and patient and therapist satisfaction with setup technique. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty eight patients were randomized to commence treatment immobilized in the supine or prone position and were subsequently changed to the alternate positioning for the latter half of their treatment. Patients underwent CT simulation and conformal radiotherapy planning and treatment in both positions. The clinical target volume encompassed the prostate gland. Alternate day lateral port films were compared to corresponding simulator radiographs to measure the isocentre positioning errors (IPE). Prostate motion (PM) and total positioning error (TPE) were measured from the same films by the displacements of three implanted fiducial markers. Dose volume histograms (DVHs) for the two treatment positions were compared at the 95, 80 and 50% dose (D%) levels. The patients and radiation therapists completed weekly questionnaires regarding patient comfort and ease of setup. RESULTS: Seven patients, who started in the supine position, subsequently refused prone position and received their whole treatment supine. Small bowel in the treatment volume, not present in the supine position, prevented one patient from being treated prone. PM in anterior posterior direction was statistically significantly less in the supine position (P<0.05). There was no significant difference in superior inferior PM for the two treatment positions. No statistically significant difference between supine and prone positioning was observed in isocentre positioning error (IPE) or total positioning error (TPE) due to a policy of daily pre-treatment correction. However, more pre-treatment corrections were required for patients in the prone position. The DVH analysis demonstrated larger volumes of the bladder wall, rectal wall and small bowel within the D95, D80 and D50% when comparing the planning target volumes (PTVs) actually treated for prone positioning. When the prone PTV was expanded to account for the greater PM encountered in that position, a statistically significant difference (P<0.007) was observed in favour of the supine position at all dose levels. In the prone position, four patients had small bowel within the 60 Gray (Gy) isodose and in the supine position, no patients had small bowel in the 60 or 38Gy volumes. Supine position was significantly more comfortable for the patients and setup was significantly easier for the radiation therapists. The median patient comfort score was 0.79 (Standard deviation (SD) 0.03) supine and 0.45 (SD 0.05) prone (P<0.001) The therapist convenience of setup was 0.80 (SD 0.016) supine and 0.54 (SD 0.025) prone (P<0.005). No statistically significant difference was seen for the other parameters studied. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated significantly less PM in the supine treatment position. There was no difference for either treatment position in IPE or TPE, however, more pre-treatment corrections were required in the prone position. Prone position required a larger PTV with resulting increased dose to critical organs. There were statistically significant improvements at all dose levels for small bowel, rectal wall and bladder wall doses in the supine position once corrections were made for differences in organ motion. Linear analogue scores of patient comfort and radiation therapist convenience demonstrated statistically significant improvement in favour of the supine position. Supine positioning has been adopted as the standard for conformal prostatic irradiation at our centre.     

Application of the No Action Level (NAL) protocol to correct for prostate motion based on electronic portal imaging of implanted markers

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of the No Action Level (NAL) off-line correction protocol in the reduction of systematic prostate displacements as determined from electronic portal images (EPI) using implanted markers. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Four platinum markers, two near the apex and two near the base of the prostate, were implanted for localization purposes in patients who received fractionated high dose rate brachytherapy. During the following course of 25 fractions of external beam radiotherapy, the position of each marker relative to the corresponding position in digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) was measured in EPI in 15 patients for on average 17 fractions per patient. These marker positions yield the composite displacements due to both setup error and internal prostate motion, relative to the planning computed tomography scan. As the NAL protocol is highly effective in reducing systematic errors (recurring each fraction) due to setup inaccuracy alone, we investigated its efficacy in reducing systematic composite displacements. The analysis was performed for the center of mass (COM) of the four markers, as well as for the cranial and caudal markers separately. Furthermore, the impact of prostate rotation on the achieved positioning accuracy was determined. RESULTS: In case of no setup corrections, the standard deviations of the systematic composite displacements of the COM were 3-4 mm in the craniocaudal and anterior-posterior directions, and 2 mm in the left-right direction. The corresponding SDs of the random displacements (interfraction fluctuations) were 2-3 mm in each direction. When applying a NAL protocol based on three initial treatment fractions, the SDs of the systematic COM displacements were reduced to 1-2 mm. Displacements at the cranial end of the prostate were slightly larger than at the caudal end, and quantitative analysis showed this originates from left-right axis rotations about the prostate apex. Further analysis revealed that significant time trends are present in these prostate rotations. No significant trends were observed for the prostate translations. CONCLUSIONS: The NAL protocol based on marker positions in EPI halved the composite systematic displacements using only three imaged fractions per patient, and thus allowed for a significant reduction of planning margins. Although large rotations of the prostate, and time trends therein, were observed, the net impact on the measured displacements and on the accuracy obtained with NAL was small.     

Daily electronic portal imaging of implanted gold seed fiducials in patients undergoing radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to measure interfraction prostate bed motion, setup error, and total positioning error in 10 consecutive patients undergoing postprostatectomy radiotherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Daily image-guided target localization and alignment using electronic portal imaging of gold seed fiducials implanted into the prostate bed under transrectal ultrasound guidance was used in 10 patients undergoing adjuvant or salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy. Prostate bed motion, setup error, and total positioning error were measured by analysis of gold seed fiducial location on the daily electronic portal images compared with the digitally reconstructed radiographs from the treatment-planning CT. RESULTS: Mean (+/- standard deviation) prostate bed motion was 0.3 +/- 0.9 mm, 0.4 +/- 2.4 mm, and -1.1 +/- 2.1 mm in the left-right (LR), superior-inferior (SI), and anterior-posterior (AP) axes, respectively. Mean set-up error was 0.1 +/- 4.5 mm, 1.1 +/- 3.9 mm, and -0.2 +/- 5.1 mm in the LR, SI, and AP axes, respectively. Mean total positioning error was 0.2 +/- 4.5 mm, 1.2 +/- 5.1 mm, and -0.3 +/- 4.5 mm in the LR, SI, and AP axes, respectively. Total positioning errors >5 mm occurred in 14.1%, 38.7%, and 28.2% of all fractions in the LR, SI, and AP axes, respectively. There was no significant migration of the gold marker seeds. CONCLUSIONS: This study validates the use of daily image-guided target localization and alignment using electronic portal imaging of implanted gold seed fiducials as a valuable method to correct for interfraction target motion and to improve precision in the delivery of postprostatectomy radiotherapy.     

Three-dimensional intrafractional movement of prostate measured during real-time tumor-tracking radiotherapy in supine and prone treatment positions

To quantify three-dimensional (3D) movement of the prostate gland with the patient in the supine and prone positions and to analyze the movement frequency for each treatment position.

The real-time tumor-tracking radiotherapy (RTRT) system was developed to identify the 3D position of a 2-mm gold marker implanted in the prostate 30 times/s using two sets of fluoroscopic images. The linear accelerator was triggered to irradiate the tumor only when the gold marker was located within the region of the planned coordinates relative to the isocenter. Ten patients with prostate cancer treated with RTRT were the subjects of this study. The coordinates of the gold marker were recorded every 0.033 s during RTRT in the supine treatment position for 2 min. The patient was then moved to the prone position, and the marker was tracked for 2 min to acquire data regarding movement in this position. Measurements were taken 5 times for each patient (once a week); a total of 50 sets for the 10 patients was analyzed. The raw data from the RTRT system were filtered to reduce system noise, and the amplitude of movement was then calculated. The discrete Fourier transform of the unfiltered data was performed for the frequency analysis of prostate movement.

No apparent difference in movement was found among individuals. The amplitude of 3D movement was 0.1–2.7 mm in the supine and 0.4–24 mm in the prone positions. The amplitude in the supine position was statistically smaller in all directions than that in the prone position (p < 0.0001). The amplitude in the craniocaudal and AP directions was larger than in the left-right direction in the prone position (p < 0.0001). No characteristic movement frequency was detected in the supine position. The respiratory frequency was detected for all patients regarding movement in the craniocaudal and AP directions in the prone position. The results of the frequency analysis suggest that prostate movement is affected by the respiratory cycle and is influenced by bowel movement in the prone position.

The results of this study have confirmed that internal organ motion is less frequent in the supine position than in the prone position in the treatment of prostate cancer. RTRT would be useful in reducing uncertainty due to the effects of the respiratory cycle, especially in the prone position.     

Internal organ motion in prostate cancer patients treated in prone and supine treatment position.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To compare supine and prone treatment positions for prostate cancer patients with respect to internal prostate motion and the required treatment planning margins. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen patients were treated in supine and fifteen in prone position. For each patient, a planning computed tomography (CT) scan was used for treatment planning. Three repeat CT scans were made in weeks 2, 4, and 6 of the radiotherapy treatment. Only for the planning CT scan, laxation was used to minimise the rectal content. For all patients, the clinical target volume (CTV) consisted of prostate and seminal vesicles. Variations in the position of the CTV relative to the bony anatomy in the four CT scans of each patient were assessed using 3D chamfer matching. The overall variations were separated into variations in the mean CTV position per patient (i.e. the systematic component) and the average 'day-to-day' variation (i.e. the random component). Required planning margins to account for the systematic and random variations in internal organ position and patient set-up were estimated retrospectively using coverage probability matrices. RESULTS: The observed overall variation in the internal CTV position was larger for the patients treated in supine position. For the supine and prone treatment positions, the random components of the variation along the anterior-posterior axis (i.e. towards the rectum) were 2.4 and 1.5 mm (I standard deviation (1 SD)), respectively; the random rotations around the left-right axis were 3.0 and 2.9 degrees (1 SD). The systematic components of these motions (1 SD) were larger: 2.6 and 3.3 mm, and 3.7 and 5.6 degrees, respectively. The set-up variations were similar for both treatment positions. Despite the smaller overall variations in CTV position for the patients in prone position, the required planning margin is equal for both groups (about 1 cm except for 0.5 cm in lateral direction) due to the larger impact of the systematic variations. However, significant time trends cause a systematic ventral-superior shift of the CTV in supine position only. CONCLUSIONS: For internal prostate movement, it is important to distinguish systematic from random variations. Compared to patients in supine position, patients in prone position had smaller random but somewhat larger systematic variations in the most important coordinates of the internal CTV position. The estimated planning margins to account for the geometrical uncertainties were therefore similar for the two treatment positions.     

Planning target margin calculations for prostate radiotherapy based on intrafraction and interfraction motion using four localization methods

PURPOSE: To determine planning target volume (PTV) margins for prostate radiotherapy based on the internal margin (IM) (intrafractional motion) and the setup margin (SM) (interfractional motion) for four daily localization methods: skin marks (tattoo), pelvic bony anatomy (bone), intraprostatic gold seeds using a 5-mm action threshold, and using no threshold. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Forty prostate cancer patients were treated with external radiotherapy according to an online localization protocol using four intraprostatic gold seeds and electronic portal images (EPIs). Daily localization and treatment EPIs were obtained. These data allowed inter- and intrafractional analysis of prostate motion. The SM for the four daily localization methods and the IM were determined. RESULTS: A total of 1532 fractions were analyzed. Tattoo localization requires a SM of 6.8 mm left-right (LR), 7.2 mm inferior-superior (IS), and 9.8 mm anterior-posterior (AP). Bone localization requires 3.1, 8.9, and 10.7 mm, respectively. The 5-mm threshold localization requires 4.0, 3.9, and 3.7 mm. No threshold localization requires 3.4, 3.2, and 3.2 mm. The intrafractional prostate motion requires an IM of 2.4 mm LR, 3.4 mm IS and AP. The PTV margin using the 5-mm threshold, including interobserver uncertainty, IM, and SM, is 4.8 mm LR, 5.4 mm IS, and 5.2 mm AP. CONCLUSIONS: Localization based on EPI with implanted gold seeds allows a large PTV margin reduction when compared with tattoo localization. Except for the LR direction, bony anatomy localization does not decrease the margins compared with tattoo localization. Intrafractional prostate motion is a limiting factor on margin reduction.     

Patient positioning in prostate radiotherapy: is prone better than supine?

PURPOSE: To assess potential dose reductions to the rectum and to the bladder with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) to the prostate in the prone as compared with the supine position; and to retrospectively evaluate treatment position reproducibility without immobilization devices. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eighteen patients with localized prostate cancer underwent pelvic CT scans and 3D treatment planning in prone and supine positions. Dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were constructed for the clinical target volume, the rectum and the bladder for every patient in both treatment positions. "Comparative DVHs" (cDVHs) were defined for the rectum and for the bladder: cDVH was obtained by subtracting the organ volume receiving a given dose increment in the prone position from the corresponding value in the supine position. These values were then integrated over the entire dose range. The prescribed dose to the planning target volume (PTV) was 74 Gy using a 6-field technique. To evaluate reproducibility, portal films were subsequently reviewed in 12 patients treated prone and 10 contemporary patients treated supine (controls). No immobilization devices were used. Deviations in the anterio-posterior (X) and cranio-caudal (Y) axes were measured. Mean treatment position variation, total setup variation, systematic setup variation, and random setup variation were obtained. RESULTS: Prone position was associated with a higher dose to the rectum or to the bladder in 6 (33%) and 7 (39%) patients, respectively. A simultaneously higher dose to rectum and bladder was noted in 2 (11%) patients in prone and in 7 (39%) patients in supine. Rectal and bladder volumes were frequently larger in prone than in supine: mean prone/supine volume ratios were 1.21 (SD, 0.68) and 1.03 (SD, 1.32), respectively. In these cases cDVH analysis more often favored the prone position. Mean treatment position variation and total setup variation were similar for both prone and supine plans. A higher systematic setup variation was observed in prone positioning: 2.7 mm vs. 1.9 mm (X axis) and 4.1 mm vs. 2.2 mm (Y axis). The random variation was similar for both prone and supine: 4. 0 mm vs. 3.6 mm (X axis) and 3.7 mm vs. 3.6 mm (Y axis). CONCLUSIONS: Prone position 3D-CRT is frequently, but not always, associated with an apparent dose reduction to the rectum and/or to the bladder for prostate cancer patients. As suggested by the increased mean prone/supine rectal volume ratio, the advantage of prone positioning for the rectum may be artifactual, at least partly reflecting a position-dependent rectal air volume, which may significantly vary from treatment to treatment. In the absence of immobilization devices, daily setup reproducibility appears less accurate for the prone position, primarily due to systematic setup variations.     

Real-time tumor-tracking radiotherapy for adrenal tumors.

PURPOSE: To investigate the three-dimensional movement of internal fiducial markers near the adrenal tumors using a real-time tumor-tracking radiotherapy (RTRT) system and to examine the feasibility of high-dose hypofractionated radiotherapy for the adrenal tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The subjects considered in this study were 10 markers of the 9 patients treated with RTRT. A total of 72 days in the prone position and 61 treatment days in the supine position for nine of the 10 markers were analyzed. All but one patient were prescribed 48 Gy in eight fractions at the isocenter. RESULTS: The average absolute amplitude of the marker movement in the prone position was 6.1+/-4.4 mm (range 2.3-14.4), 11.1+/-7.1 mm (3.5-25.2), and 7.0+/-3.5 mm (3.9-12.5) in the left-right (LR), craniocaudal (CC), and anterior-posterior (AP) directions, respectively. The average absolute amplitude in the supine position was 3.4+/-2.9 mm (0.6-9.1), 9.9+/-9.8 mm (1.1-27.1), and 5.4+/-5.2 mm (1.7-26.6) in the LR, CC, and AP directions, respectively. Of the eight markers, which were examined in both the prone and supine positions, there was no significant difference in the average absolute amplitude between the two positions. No symptomatic adverse effects were observed within the median follow-up period of 16 months (range 5-21 months). The actuarial freedom-from-local-progression rate was 100% at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional motion of a fiducial marker near the adrenal tumors was detected. Hypofractionated RTRT for adrenal tumors was feasible for patients with metastatic tumors.     

Retrospective analysis of prostate cancer patients with implanted gold markers using off-line and adaptive therapy protocols

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of applying adaptive and off-line setup correction models to bony anatomy and gold fiducial markers implanted in the prostate, relative to daily alignment to skin tattoos and daily on-line corrections of the implanted gold markers. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten prostate cancer patients with implanted gold fiducial markers were treated using a daily on-line setup correction protocol. The patients' positions were aligned to skin tattoos and two orthogonal diagnostic digital radiographs were obtained before treatment each day. These radiographs were compared with digitally reconstructed radiographs to obtain the translational setup errors of the bony anatomy and gold markers. The adaptive, no-action-level and shrinking-action-level off-line protocols were retrospectively applied to the bony anatomy to determine the change in the setup errors of the gold markers. The protocols were also applied to the gold markers directly to determine the residual setup errors. RESULTS: The percentage of remaining fractions that the gold markers fell within the adaptive margins constructed with 1.5sigma' (estimated random variation) after 5, 10, and 15 measurement fractions was 74%, 88%, and 93% for the prone patients and 55%, 77%, and 93% for the supine patients, respectively. Using 2sigma', the percentage after 5, 10, and 15 measurements was 85%, 95%, and 97% for the prone patients and 68%, 87%, and 99% for the supine patients, respectively. The average initial three-dimensional (3D) setup error of the gold markers was 0.92 cm for the prone patients and 0.70 cm for the supine patients. Application of the no-action-level protocol to bony anatomy with N(m) = 3 days resulted in significant benefit to 4 of 10 patients, but 3 were significantly worse. The residual average 3D setup error of the gold markers was 1.14 cm and 0.51 cm for the prone and supine patients, respectively. When applied directly to the gold markers with N(m) = 3 days, 5 patients benefited and 3 were significantly worse. The residual 3D error of the gold markers was 1.14 cm and 0.76 cm for the prone and supine patients, respectively. Application of the shrinking-action-level protocol to bony anatomy with an initial action level of 1.0 cm and N(max) = 5 days decreased the residual systematic offset of the gold markers in 2 of 10 patients. The residual average 3D setup error of the gold markers was 1.2 cm and 1.0 cm for the prone and supine patients, respectively. When applied directly to the gold markers with N(max) = 5 days, the residual systematic offset of the gold markers decreased in 6 of 10 patients (0.84 cm and 0.67 cm for the prone and supine patients, respectively). In general, between 3 and 5 of the 10 patients showed significant decreases in setup errors with the application of these off-line protocols, and the remaining patients showed no significant improvement or showed significantly larger setup errors, as determined by the residual error of the gold markers. CONCLUSION: Changes in a prostate cancer patient's systematic and random setup characteristics during the course of therapy often violate the gaussian assumptions of adaptive and off-line correction models. Thus, off-line setup correction procedures, especially those directed at prostate localization using markers, will result in limited benefit to a minority of patients. The relative benefit of on-line localization is still potentially significant if the intrafraction motion is relatively small.     

An evaluation of intrafraction motion of the prostate in the prone and supine positions using electromagnetic tracking

Purpose

To evaluate differences in target motion during prostate irradiation in the prone versus supine position using electromagnetic tracking to measure prostate mobility.

Materials/methods

Twenty patients received prostate radiotherapy in the supine position utilizing the Calypso Localization System® for prostate positioning and monitoring. For each patient, 10 treatment fractions were followed by a session in which the patient was repositioned prone, and prostate mobility was tracked. The fraction of time that the prostate was displaced by >3, 5, 7, and 10 mm was calculated for each patient, for both positions (400 tracking sessions).

Results

Clear patterns of respiratory motion were seen in the prone tracks due to the influence of increased abdominal motion. Averaged over all patients, the prostate was displaced >3 and 5 mm for 37.8% and 10.1% of the total tracking time in the prone position, respectively. In the supine position, the prostate was displaced >3 and 5 mm for 12.6% and 2.9%, respectively. With both patient setups, inferior and posterior drifts of the prostate position were observed. Averaged over all prone tracking sessions, the prostate was displaced >3 mm in the posterior and inferior directions for 11.7% and 9.5% of the total time, respectively.

Conclusions

With real-time tracking of the prostate, it is possible to study the effects of different setup positions on the prostate mobility. The percentage of time the prostate moved >3 and 5 mm was increased by a factor of three in the prone versus supine position. For larger displacements (>7 mm) no difference in prostate mobility was observed between prone and supine positions. To reduce rectal toxicity, radiotherapy in the prone position may be a suitable alternative provided respiratory motion is accounted for during treatment. Acute and late toxicity results remain to be evaluated for both patient positions.     

自制脚部固定器在下肢肿瘤等放疗中的应用

目的 探讨自制脚部固定器在下肢肿瘤等放疗中的应用价值。方法 31例患者下肢放疗时应用脚部固定器定位固定,放疗中每周拍摄验证片,通过验证片和模拟定位片或计划系统生成的数字重建影像比较分析摆位误差。配对t检验差异。结果 患者上下、前后、左右方向摆位误差分别为(2.39±2.21)、(0.22±2.73)、(0.20±2.71) mm,上下方向偏移较前后、左右方向大(P=0.000、0.000)。结论 下肢肿瘤等放疗中应用脚部固定器具有良好准确性和重复性,值得推广。     

Determination of ventilatory liver movement via radiographic evaluation of diaphragm position

PURPOSE: To determine the accuracy of estimation of liver movement inferred by observing diaphragm excursion on radiographic images. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eight patients with focal liver cancer had platinum embolization microcoils implanted in their livers during catheterization of the hepatic artery for delivery of regional chemotherapy. These patients underwent fluoroscopy, during which normal breathing movement was recorded on videotape. Movies of breathing movement were digitized, and the relative projected positions of the diaphragm and coils were recorded. For 6 patients, daily radiographs were also acquired during treatment. Retrospective measurements of coil position were taken after the diaphragm was aligned with the superior portion of the liver on digitally reconstructed radiographs. RESULTS: Coil movement of 4.9 to 30.4 mm was observed during normal breathing. Diaphragm position tracked inferior-superior coil displacement accurately (population sigma 1.04 mm) throughout the breathing cycle. The range of coil movement was predicted by the range of diaphragm movement with an accuracy of 2.09 mm (sigma). The maximum error observed measuring coil movement using diaphragm position was 3.8 mm for a coil 9.8 cm inferior to the diaphragm. However, the distance of the coil from the top of the diaphragm did not correlate significantly with the error in predicting liver excursion. Analysis of daily radiographs showed that the error in predicting coil position using the diaphragm as an alignment landmark was 1.8 mm (sigma) in the inferior-superior direction and 2.2 mm in the left-right direction, similar in magnitude to the inherent uncertainty in alignment. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that the range of ventilatory movement of different locations within the liver is predicted by diaphragm position to an accuracy that matches or exceeds existing systems for ventilatory tracking. This suggests that the diaphragm is an acceptable anatomic landmark for radiographic estimation of liver movement in anterior-posterior projections for most patients.     

The effect of patient position and treatment technique in conformal treatment of prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: The relative value of prone versus supine positioning and axial versus nonaxial beam arrangements in the treatment of prostate cancer remains controversial. Two critical issues in comparing techniques are: 1) dose to critical normal tissues, and 2) prostate stabilization. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten patients underwent pretreatment CT scans in one supine and two prone positions (flat and angled). To evaluate normal tissue exposure, prostate/seminal vesicle volumes or prostate volumes were expanded 8 mm and covered by the 95% isodose surface by both 6-field axial and 4-field nonaxial techniques. A total of 280 dose-volume histograms (DVHs) were analyzed to evaluate dose to rectal wall and bladder relative to patient position and beam arrangement. A CT scan was repeated in each patient after 5 weeks of treatment. Prostate motion was assessed by comparing early to late scans by three methods: 1) center of mass shift, 2) superior pubic symphysis to anterior prostate distance, and 3) deviation of the posterior surface of the prostate. RESULTS: For prostate (P) or prostate/seminal vesicle (P/SV) treatments, prone flat was advantageous or equivalent to other positions with regard to rectal sparing. The mechanism of rectal sparing in the prone position may be related to a paradoxical retraction of the rectum against the sacrum, away from the P/SV. Although there was no clear overall preference for beam arrangement, substantial improvements in rectal sparing could be realized for individual patients. In this limited number of patients, there was no convincing evidence prostate position was stabilized by prone relative to supine position. CONCLUSIONS: Prone flat positioning was advantageous over other positions and beam arrangements in rectal sparing. This study suggests that patient position is a more critical a factor in conformal therapy than beam arrangement, and may improve the safety of dose escalation.     

体质量指数对宫颈癌调强放疗摆位误差影响

目的:探讨宫颈癌患者体质量指数(BMI)对调强放疗摆位误差的影响,以及在不考虑旋转误差、靶区及邻近器官变化的情况下不同BMI宫颈癌患者放疗的最佳体位。方法:将90例宫颈癌患者根据BMI分为过轻组(BMI≤18.4 kg/m 2)、正常组(18.5 kg/m 2≤BMI≤23.9 kg/m ...     

Feasibility study using a Ni-Ti stent and electronic portal imaging to localize the prostate during radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A new method for localization of the prostate during external beam radiotherapy is presented. The method is based on insertion of a thermo-expandable Ni-Ti stent. The stent is originally developed for treatment of bladder outlet obstruction caused by benign hyperplasia. The radiological properties of the stent are used for precise prostate localization during treatment using electronic portal images. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients referred for intended curative radiotherapy and having a length of their prostatic urethra in the range from 25 to 65 mm were included. Pairs of isocentric orthogonal portal images were used to determine the 3D position at eight different treatment sessions for each patient. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were enrolled in the study. The data obtained demonstrated that the stent position was representative of the prostate location. The stent may also improve delineation of the prostate GTV, and prevent obstruction of bladder outlet during treatment. Precision in localization of the stent was less than 1 mm. Random errors in stent position were left-right 1.6 mm, cranial-caudal 2.2 mm and anterior-posterior 3.2 mm. In four of 14 patients a dislocation of the stent to the bladder occurred. Dislocation only occurred in patients with length of prostatic urethra less than 40 mm. CONCLUSIONS: A new method for radiological high precision localization of the prostate during radiotherapy is presented. The method is based on insertion of a standard Ni-Ti thermo-expandable stent, designed for treatment of benign prostate hyperplasia.     

Prostate bed localization with image-guided approach using on-board imaging: Reporting acute toxicity and implications for radiation therapy planning following prostatectomy

OBJECTIVES: To report our experience using Image-Guided Radiation Therapy (IGRT) in patients undergoing post-prostatectomy irradiation. METHODS: Twenty-six patients were treated with radiotherapy following radical prostatectomy using Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT). Prostate bed localization was done using image guidance to align surgical clips relative to the reference isocenter on the planning digitally reconstructed radiographs. Assuming surgical clips to be surrogate for prostate bed, daily shifts in their position were calculated after aligning with the bony anatomy. Shifts were recorded in three dimensions. The acute toxicity was measured during and after completion of treatment. RESULTS: The average (standard deviation) prostate bed motion in anterior-posterior, superior-inferior and left-right directions were: 2.7mm (2.1), 2.4mm (2.1) and 1.0mm (1.7), respectively. The majority of patients experienced only grade 1 symptoms, two patients had grade 2 symptoms and none had grade 3 or higher acute toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Daily IGRT is recommended for accurate target localization during radiation delivery to improve efficacy of treatment and enhance therapeutic ratio. Larger studies with longer follow-up are necessary to make definitive recommendations regarding magnitude of margin reduction around clinical target volume.     

胸部肿瘤三维适形放疗摆位的重复性研究

目的：研究胸部肿瘤三维适形放疗的摆位误差大小和影响因素,为胸部肿瘤适形放疗计划设计时CTV外放PTV提供参考数据。方法：21例胸部肿瘤患者接受三维适形放疗。男12例,女9例。其中食管癌9例,肺癌7例,乳腺癌5例。首次摆位后,去掉体膜,在患者体表沿激光十字画出三个等中心点的坐标位置,并以该三个坐标为标准坐标,测量前后、头脚、左右方向摆位误差。每例病例连续测量5次,共计摆位105次。所有病例分为两组,A组11例,测量55次,未在体表标记体膜相对位置。B组10例,测量50次,CT模拟定位时在体表标记体膜相对位置。结果：人与人间以及次与次间均存在一定差别。头脚方向摆位误差最大,腹背方向次之,左右方向最小。B组摆位误差左右方向为（2.2±1.9）mm,头脚方向为（4.3±2.6）mm,腹背方向为（2.6±1.7）mm。与A组比较,误差在Y、Z方向有显著性差异。结论：CT模拟定位时,在体表标记体膜的相对位置可减少三维适形放疗的摆位误差。胸部放疗的CTV-PTV扩边范围（MPTV）应适当扩充为左右方向5.4mm、头脚方向8.3mm和腹背方向5.5mm。