• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.40 no.1
• /
• pp.63-70
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study was compare to the patient setup deviation of two different type thermoplastic immobilization masks for glottis cancer in the intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). A total of 16 glottis cancer cases were divided into two groups based on applied mask type: standard or alternative group. The mean error (M), three-dimensional setup displacement error (3D-error), systematic error (${\Sigma}$), random error (${\sigma}$) were calculated for each group, and also analyzed setup margin (mm). The 3D-errors were $5.2{\pm}1.3mm$ and $5.9{\pm}0.7mm$ for the standard and alternative groups, respectively; the alternative group was 13.6% higher than the standard group. The systematic errors in the roll angle and the x, y, z directions were $0.8^{\circ}$, 1.7 mm, 1.0 mm, and 1.5 mm in the alternative group and $0.8^{\circ}$, 1.1 mm, 1.8 mm, and 2.0 mm in the alternative group. The random errors in the x, y, z directions were 10.9%, 1.7%, and 23.1% lower in the alternative group than in the standard group. However, absolute rotational angle (i.e., roll) in the alternative group was 12.4% higher than in the standard group. For calculated setup margin, the alternative group in x direction was 31.8% lower than in standard group. In contrast, the y and z direction were 52.6% and 21.6% higher than in the standard group. Although using a modified thermoplastic immobilization mask could be affect patient setup deviation in terms of numerical results, various point of view for an immobilization masks has need to research in terms of clinic issue.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.42 no.2
• /
• pp.137-143
• /
• 2019

The aim of this study was analyzed the setup error of breast cancer patients in intensity modulated radiation therapy(IMRT) with deep inspiration breath holding(DIBH) and was analyzed the dose distribution due to setup error. A total of 45 breast cancer cases were performed a retrospective clinical analysis of setup error. In addition, the re-treatment planning was carried by shifting the setup error from the isocenter at the treatment. Based on this, the dose distribution of PTV and OARs was compared and analyzed. The 3D error for small breast group and medium breast group and large breast group were 3.1 mm and 3.7 mm and 4.1 mm, respectively. The difference between the groups was statistically significant(P=0.003). DVH results showed HI, CI for the PTV difference between standard treatment plan and re-treatment plan of 14.4%, 4%. The difference in $D_5$ and $V_{20}$ of the ipsilateral lung was 5.6%, 13% respectively. The difference in $D_5$ and $V_5$ of the heart of right breast cancer patients was 6.8%, 8% respectively. The difference in $D_5$, $V_{20}$ of the heart of left breast cancer patients was 7.2%, 23.5% respectively. In this study, there was a significant association between breast size and significant setup error in breast cancer patients with DIBH. In addition, it was found that the dose distribution of the PTV and OARs varied according to the setup error.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.6-11
• /
• 2015

The purpose of this study was to analyze the rotational errors of roll, pitch, and yaw in the whole breast cancer treated by the three-dimensional radiation therapy (3D-CRT) using TomoDirect (TD). Twenty-patient previously treated with TD 3D-CRT was selected. We performed a retrospective clinical analysis based on 80 images of megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) including the systematic and random variation with patient setup errors and treatment setup margin (mm). In addition, a rotational error (degree) for each patient was analyzed using the automatic image registration. The treatment margin of X, Y, and Z directions were 4.2 mm, 6.2 mm, and 6.4 mm, respectively. The mean value of the rotational error for roll, pitch, and yaw were $0.3^{\circ}$, $0.5^{\circ}$, $0.1^{\circ}$, and all of systematic and random error was within $1.0^{\circ}$. The errors of patient positioning with the Y and Z directions have generally been mainly higher than the X direction. The percentage in treatment fractions in less than $2^{\circ}$ at roll, pitch, and yaw are 95.1%, 98.8%, and 97.5%, respectively. However, the edge of upper and lower (i.e., bottom) based on the center of therapy region (point) will quite a possibility that it is expected to twist even longer as the length of treatment region. The patient-specific characters should be considered for the accuracy and reproducibility of treatment and it is necessary to confirm periodically the rotational errors, including patient repositioning and repeating MVCT scan.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.123-129
• /
• 2013

Purpose: The way check the movement of the fiducial marker insertion in the treatment of patients with prostate cancer. However the existing methods of fiducial marker verification process difficult to identify the specific location of the marker behind the femur and pelvic bone. So to study the evaluation of maker match with using kilo voltage (KV) X-ray by On-board imager to both oblique verification method. Materials and Methods: Five patients were selected for rectal ballooning and inserted fiducial marker. Compare the position of the fiducial marker of reference plan 2D/2D Anterior/Posterior verification method and 2D/2D both oblique verification method. So to measurement the shift score of X, Y, Z (axis) and measure exposure dose given to patients and compare matching time. Results: 2 dimensional OBI KV X-ray imaging using two-dimensional matching image are orthogonal, so locating fiducial marker matching clear and useful DRR (digital reconstruction radiography) OBI souce angle ($45^{\circ}/315^{\circ}$) matching most useful. 2D/2D both oblique verification method was able to see clearly marker behind the pelvic bone. Also matching time can be reduced accordingly. According to the method of each matching results for each patient in each treatment fraction, X, Y, and Z axis the Mean $value{\pm}SD$ (standard deviation) is X axis (AP/LAT: $0.4{\pm}1.67$, OBLIQUE: $0.4{\pm}1.82$) mm, Y axis (AP/LAT: $0.7{\pm}1.73$, OBLIQUE: $0.2{\pm}1.77$) mm, Z axis (AP/LAT: $0.8{\pm}1.94$, OBLIQUE:$1.5{\pm}2.8$) mm. In addition, the KV X-ray source dose radiation exposure given to the patient taking average when AP/LAT matching is (0.1/2.1) cGY, when $315^{\circ}/45^{\circ}$ matching is (0.27/0.26) cGY. Conclusion: In conclusion for inserted fiducial marker of prostate cancer patients 2D/2D both oblique matching method is more accurate verification than 2D/2D AP/LAT matching method. Also the matching time less than the 2D/2D AP/LAT matching method. Taken as the amount of radiation exposure to patients less than was possible. Suggest would improve the treatment quality of care patients more useful to establish a protocol such as case.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.72-78
• /
• 2011

The aim of this study is to evaluate the patient's setup errors in TomoTherapy (Hi-Art II, TomoTherapy, USA) Bodyfix system (Medical Intelligence, Ele-kta, Schwabmuchen, Germany) pressure in the vacuum compression, depending on and were evaluated. Bodyfix immobilization system and vacuum pressure was compression applied to the patients who received Tomotherapy thoracic and abdominal area, 21 patients were selected and TomoTehpay treatment total 477 of MVCT images were obtained. The translational (medial-lateral: ML, anterior-posterior: AP, superior-inferior: SI directions) and rolling were recorded and analyzed statistically. Using Pearson's product-moment coefficient and One-way ANOVA, the degree of correlation depending on the different vacuum pressure levels were statistically analyzed for setup errors from five groups (p<0.05). The largest average and standard deviation of systematic errors were 6.00, 5.95 mm in the AP and SI directions, respectively. The largest average of random errors were 4.72 mm in the SI directions. The correlation coefficients were 0.485, 0.244, and 0.637 for the ML-Roll, AP-Vector, and SI-Vector, respectively. SI-Vector direction showed the best relationship. In the results of the different degree of vacuum pressure in five groups (Pressure range: 30~70 mbar), the setup errors between the ML, SI in both directions and Roll p=0.00 (p<0.05) were shown significant differences. The average errors of SI direction in the vacuum pressure of 40 mbar and 70 mbar group were 4.78 mm and -0.74 mm, respectively. In this study, the correlation between the vacuum pressure and the setup-errors were statistically analyzed. The fact that setup-errors in SI direction is dependent in vacuum pressure considerly setup-errors and movement of interal organs was identified. Finally, setup-errors, and it, based on the movement of internal organs in Bodyfix system we should apply more than 50 mbar vacuum pressure. Based on the results of this study, it is suggested that accuracy of the vacuum pressure and the quantitative analysis of movement of internal organs and the tumor should be studied.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.35-40
• /
• 2003

I. Purpose Confirming an error to be able to break out in a method to move couch manually while operator sees the skin marks on patient in case of curing head who got 2 targets adjoined, so we analyze coordinates price of couch, evaluate reproducibility and precision of change movements between targets. II. Materials and Methods In radiotherapy, for confirming errors in manual movements by operators by exchanging between two targets to treat patient head, we read coordinates price(vertical, longitudinal, lateral three directions of couch) shown on a monitor of LINAC( CL 2100, Varian, USA) in order to evaluate accuracy about the length that moved in time for moving couch manually. After reading movement length of coordinates recorded in three directions of all treatment, we compared distance between targets recorded in RTP(Pinnacle, ADAC, USA) with reading coordinates price of couch, setting actually done the same patient for ten times, coordinates were recorded, treated for evaluating averages and degrees of errors and standard deviations. III. Results In method to confirm skin marks of patient by operators' view and to move couch manually, average standard deviations of movements between two targets are vertical 1.4mm, longitudinal 0.9mm, lateral 2.2mm in each direction. As for the error in straight dimension, it is about 3.6mm averages and 5.1mm maximum. The average of errors in each directions was vertical 1mm, longitudinal 0.7mm, lateral 2.7mm. The greatest error broke out in lateral direction with $25\%$ of all cases ; to exceed an error average. IV. Conclusions If operators moved manually couch for changing target points, errors about 3.6mm average degrees occur. It is important that operators confirm the errors prices of actual couch coordinates for asking a correct movement between the targets adjoined each other ; in case of treatment demanding high precision like 3D conformal therapy or IMRT. Therefore, if we apply couch coordinates confirmation to reproducibility and to precision evaluation of treatment, it's expected that we can execute high-quality radiotherapy.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.85-91
• /
• 2013

At present, megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) is the only method used to correct the position of tomotherapy patients. MVCT produces extra radiation, in addition to the radiation used for treatment, and repositioning also takes up much of the total treatment time. To address these issues, we suggest the use of a video image-guided setup (VIGS) system for correcting the position of tomotherapy patients. We developed an in-house program to correct the exact position of patients using two orthogonal images obtained from two video cameras installed at $90^{\circ}$ and fastened inside the tomotherapy gantry. The system is programmed to make automatic registration possible with the use of edge detection of the user-defined region of interest (ROI). A head-and-neck patient is then simulated using a humanoid phantom. After taking the computed tomography (CT) image, tomotherapy planning is performed. To mimic a clinical treatment course, we used an immobilization device to position the phantom on the tomotherapy couch and, using MVCT, corrected its position to match the one captured when the treatment was planned. Video images of the corrected position were used as reference images for the VIGS system. First, the position was repeatedly corrected 10 times using MVCT, and based on the saved reference video image, the patient position was then corrected 10 times using the VIGS method. Thereafter, the results of the two correction methods were compared. The results demonstrated that patient positioning using a video-imaging method ($41.7{\pm}11.2$ seconds) significantly reduces the overall time of the MVCT method ($420{\pm}6$ seconds) (p<0.05). However, there was no meaningful difference in accuracy between the two methods (x=0.11 mm, y=0.27 mm, z=0.58 mm, p>0.05). Because VIGS provides a more accurate result and reduces the required time, compared with the MVCT method, it is expected to manage the overall tomotherapy treatment process more efficiently.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.45-53
• /
• 2008

Purpose: We are trying to analyze 130 patients' conditions by using our Helical Tomotherapy, which was installed in our center in Oct. 2007. We will be statistically approach this examination and analyze so that we will be able to figure out adaptive plans according to the change in place of the tumor, GTV (gross tumor volume), total amount of time it took, vector (${\upsilon}=\surd$x2+y2+z2) and the change in size of the tumor. Materials and Methods: Objectives were the patients who were medicated with Tomotherapy in our medical center since Oct. 2007 August 2008. The Average age of the patients were 53 years old (Minimum 25 years old, Maximum 83 years old). The parts of the body we operated were could be categorized as Head&neck (n=22), Chest (n=47), Abdomen (n=25), Pelvis (n=11), Bone (n=25). MVCT had acted on 2702 times, and also had acted on our adaptive plan toward patients who showed big difference in the size of tumor. Also, after equalizing our gained MVCT and kv-CT we checked up on the range of possible mistake, using x, y, z, roll and vector. We've also investigated on Set-up, MVCT, average time of operation and target volume. Results: Mean time on table was 22.8 minutes. Mean treatment time was 13.26 minutes. Mean correction (mm) was X=-0.7, Y=-1.4, Z=5.77, roll=0.29, vector=8.66 Head&neck patients had 2.96 mm less vector value in movement than patients of Chest, Abdomen, Bone. In increasing order, Head&neck, Bone, Abdomen, Chest, Pelvis showed the vector value in movement. Also, there were 27 patients for adaptive plan, 39 patients, who had long or multiple tumor. We could know that When medical treatment is one cure plan, it takes 32 minutes, and when medical treatment is two cure plan, it takes 40 minutes that one medical treatment takes 21 minutes, and the other medical treatment takes 19 minutes. Conclusion:With our basic tools, we could bring more accurate IMRT with MVCT. Also, through our daily image, we checked up on the change in tumor so that adaptive plan could work. It was made it possible to take the cure of long or multiple tumor, the cure in a nearby OAR, and the complicated cure that should make changes of gradient dose distribution.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.83-89
• /
• 2014

Purpose : In case of the intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) using Tomotherapy and linear accelerator (Linac), it was to compare and to evaluate the imaging dose of MVCT and CBCT that were performed daily for the correct set up of the patient. Materials and Methods : The human body model Phantom (Anderson rando Phantom, USA) was divided into the three parts as Head, Thorax, pelvis, and after GafChromic EBT3 film cut to the size of $0.5{\times}0.5cm2$.in the center of the recording area were situated on the ant, post, left, and right surface of the phantom and 2cm in depth from the ant, post, left, right, and center surface of the phantom, the surface dose and inner dose were measured repeatedly three times, respectively, using the tomotherapy (Hi Art) and the OBI of NovalisTx. The measured film calculated the output value by RIP version6.0 and then the average value of the dose was calculated by the one-way analysis of variance. Results : Using the human body model phantom, the results of MVCT and CBCT performance were that measurements of MVCT inner dose were showed $15.43cGy{\pm}6.05$ in the head, $16.62cGy{\pm}3.08$ in the thorax, $16.81cGy{\pm}5.24$ in the pelvis, and measurements of CBCT inner dose were showed $13.28{\pm}3.68$ in the head, from $13.66{\pm}4.04$ in the thorax, $15.52{\pm}3.52$ in the pelvis. The measurements of surface dose were showed in case of MVCT performance, $11.64{\pm}4.05$ in the head, $12.16{\pm}4.38$ in the thorax, $12.05{\pm}2.71$ in the pelvis, and in case of CBCT performance, $14.59{\pm}3.51$ in the head, $15.82{\pm}2.89$ in the thorax, $17.48{\pm}2.80$ in the pelvis, respectively. Conclusion : In case of Inner dose, the MVCT using MV energy showed higher than the CBCT using kV energy at 1.16 times in the head, at 1.22 times in the thorax, at 1.08 times in the pelvis, and in case of surface dose, the CBCT was higher than MVCT, at 1.25 times in the head, at 1.30 times in the thorax, at 1.45 times in the pelvis. Imaging dose was a small amount compared to the therapeutic dose but it was thought to affect partially to normal tissue because it was done in daily schedule. However, IMRT treatment was necessarily parallel with the IGRT treatment through the image-guide to minimize errors between planned and actual treatment. Thus, to minimize imaging dose that the patients receive, when planning the treatment, it should be set up a treatment plan considering imaging dose, or it must be performed by minimizing the scan range when shooting MVCT.