• Title/Summary/Keyword: MVCT(Mega Voltage Computed Tomograpy)

Search Result 2, Processing Time 0.022 seconds

Accuracy and radiation exposure from image-guidance in Tomotherapy Hi-Art System (토모테라피 Hi-Art System의 영상유도 정확성 평가와 환자 피폭에 관한 연구)

  • Jang, Jae-Uk;Lim, Hyun-Soo;Han, Man-Seok;Kim, Yong-Kyun;Jeon, Min-Cheol
    • Journal of Digital Convergence
    • /
    • v.11 no.10
    • /
    • pp.577-584
    • /
    • 2013
  • IGRT(Image Guided Radiation Therapy) in radiation therapy is a very useful technique in order to increase setup of patient and position reproducibility. Tomotherapy can increase accuracy of setup to take IGRT by MVCT, but it be for verified accuracy of Image guided, and MVCT occurs the exposure of patient. Through this study, IGRT accuracy of Tomotherapy is very accurate within 1.0mm. When MVCT using Tomotherapy phantom for QA, QC be taken, exposure dose is Fine(2mm Slice thickness) 3cGy, Normal(4mm Slice thickness) 1.5cGy, Corse(6mmSlice thickness) 1.0cGy. Measurement value of spatial resolution using AAPM CT performance phantom did't cause a big difference. As a result, ability of IGRT in Tomotherapy is very accurate. While obtaining image for IGRT, we should minimize expose range because patient's be exposed to radiation. We should make an effort to do accurate radiation therapy to minimize exposure of patient by selecting the appropriate thickness of MVCT depending on patient's body and treat area.

Usefulness of Abdominal Compressor Using Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy with Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients (토모테라피를 이용한 간암환자의 정위적 방사선치료시 복부압박장치의 유용성 평가)

  • Woo, Joong-Yeol;Kim, Joo-Ho;Kim, Joon-Won;Baek, Jong-Geal;Park, Kwang-Soon;Lee, Jong-Min;Son, Dong-Min;Lee, Sang-Kyoo;Jeon, Byeong-Chul;Cho, Jeong-Hee
    • The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
    • /
    • v.24 no.2
    • /
    • pp.157-165
    • /
    • 2012
  • Purpose: We evaluated usefulness of abdominal compressor for stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients and hepato-biliary cancer and metastatic liver cancer patients. Materials and Methods: From November 2011 to March 2012, we selected HCC patients who gained reduction of diaphragm movement >1 cm through abdominal compressor (diaphragm control, elekta, sweden) for HT (Hi-Art Tomotherapy, USA). We got planning computed tomography (CT) images and 4 dimensional (4D) images through 4D CT (somatom sensation, siemens, germany). The gross tumor volume (GTV) included a gross tumor and margins considering tumor movement. The planning target volume (PTV) included a 5 to 7 mm safety margin around GTV. We classified patients into two groups according to distance between tumor and organs at risk (OAR, stomach, duodenum, bowel). Patients with the distance more than 1 cm are classified as the 1st group and they received SBRT of 4 or 5 fractions. Patients with the distance less than 1 cm are classified as the 2nd group and they received tomotherapy of 20 fractions. Megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) were performed 4 or 10 fractions. When we verify a MVCT fusion considering priority to liver than bone-technique. We sent MVCT images to Mim_vista (Mimsoftware, ver .5.4. USA) and we re-delineated stomach, duodenum and bowel to bowel_organ and delineated liver. First, we analyzed MVCT images to check the setup variation. Second we compared dose difference between tumor and OAR based on adaptive dose through adaptive planning station and Mim_vista. Results: Average setup variation from MVCT was $-0.66{\pm}1.53$ mm (left-right) $0.39{\pm}4.17$ mm (superior-inferior), $0.71{\pm}1.74$ mm (anterior-posterior), $-0.18{\pm}0.30$ degrees (roll). 1st group ($d{\geq}1$) and 2nd group (d<1) were similar to setup variation. 1st group ($d{\geq}1$) of $V_{diff3%}$ (volume of 3% difference of dose) of GTV through adaptive planing station was $0.78{\pm}0.05%$, PTV was $9.97{\pm}3.62%$, $V_{diff5%}$ was GTV 0.0%, PTV was $2.9{\pm}0.95%$, maximum dose difference rate of bowel_organ was $-6.85{\pm}1.11%$. 2nd Group (d<1) GTV of $V_{diff3%}$ was $1.62{\pm}0.55%$, PTV was $8.61{\pm}2.01%$, $V_{diff5%}$ of GTV was 0.0%, PTV was $5.33{\pm}2.32%$, maximum dose difference rate of bowel_organ was $28.33{\pm}24.41%$. Conclusion: Despite we saw diaphragm movement more than 5 mm with flouroscopy after use an abdominal compressor, average setup_variation from MVCT was less than 5 mm. Therefore, we could estimate the range of setup_error within a 5 mm. Target's dose difference rate of 1st group ($d{\geq}1$) and 2nd group (d<1) were similar, while 1st group ($d{\geq}1$) and 2nd group (d<1)'s bowel_organ's maximum dose difference rate's maximum difference was more than 35%, 1st group ($d{\geq}1$)'s bowel_organ's maximum dose difference rate was smaller than 2nd group (d<1). When applicating SBRT to HCC, abdominal compressor is useful to control diaphragm movement in selected patients with more than 1 cm bowel_organ distance.

  • PDF