Surface imaging, laser positioning or volumetric imaging for breast cancer with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy

Frederik Crop, David Pasquier, Amandine Baczkiewic, Julie Doré, Lena Bequet, Emeline Steux, Anne Gadroy, Jacqueline Bouillon, Clement Florence, Laurence Muszynski, Mathilde Lacour, Eric Lartigau
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 2016 September 8, 17 (5): 200-211
A surface imaging system, Catalyst (C-Rad), was compared with laser-based positioning and daily mega voltage computed tomography (MVCT) setup for breast patients with nodal involvement treated by helical TomoTherapy. Catalyst-based positioning performed better than laser-based positioning. The respective modalities resulted in a standard deviation (SD), 68% confidence interval (CI) of positioning of left-right, craniocaudal, anterior-posterior, roll: 2.4 mm, 2.7 mm, 2.4 mm, 0.9° for Catalyst positioning, and 6.1 mm, 3.8 mm, 4.9 mm, 1.1° for laser-based positioning, respectively. MVCT-based precision is a combination of the interoperator variability for MVCT fusion and the patient movement during the time it takes for MVCT and fusion. The MVCT fusion interoperator variability for breast patients was evaluated at one SD left-right, craniocaudal, ant-post, roll as: 1.4 mm, 1.8 mm, 1.3 mm, 1.0°. There was no statistically significant difference between the automatic MVCT registration result and the manual adjustment; the automatic fusion results were within the 95% CI of the mean result of 10 users, except for one specific case where the patient was positioned with large yaw. We found that users add variability to the roll correction as the automatic registration was more consistent. The patient position uncertainty confidence interval was evaluated as 1.9 mm, 2.2 mm, 1.6 mm, 0.9° after 4 min, and 2.3 mm, 2.8 mm, 2.2 mm, 1° after 10 min. The combination of this patient movement with MVCT fusion interoperator variability results in total standard deviations of patient posi-tion when treatment starts 4 or 10 min after initial positioning of, respectively: 2.3 mm, 2.8 mm, 2.0 mm, 1.3° and 2.7 mm, 3.3 mm, 2.6 mm, 1.4°. Surface based positioning arrives at the same precision when taking into account the time required for MVCT imaging and fusion. These results can be used on a patient-per-patient basis to decide which positioning system performs the best after the first 5 fractions and when daily MVCT can be omitted. Ideally, real-time monitoring is required to reduce important intrafraction movement.

Full Text Links

Find Full Text Links for this Article


You are not logged in. Sign Up or Log In to join the discussion.

Related Papers

Remove bar
Read by QxMD icon Read

Save your favorite articles in one place with a free QxMD account.


Search Tips

Use Boolean operators: AND/OR

diabetic AND foot
diabetes OR diabetic

Exclude a word using the 'minus' sign

Virchow -triad

Use Parentheses

water AND (cup OR glass)

Add an asterisk (*) at end of a word to include word stems

Neuro* will search for Neurology, Neuroscientist, Neurological, and so on

Use quotes to search for an exact phrase

"primary prevention of cancer"
(heart or cardiac or cardio*) AND arrest -"American Heart Association"