검색
검색 팝업 닫기

Ex) Article Title, Author, Keywords

Article

Original Article

Korean Journal of Medical Physics 2016; 27(4): 250-257

Published online December 31, 2016

Copyright © Korean Society of Medical Physics.

Comparison of Two Different Immobilization Devices for Pelvic Region Radiotherapy in Tomotherapy

Dae Gun Kim, James J Jung, Kwang Hwan Cho*, Mi Ryeong Ryu*, Seong Kwon Moon*, Sun Hyun Bae*, Jae Ouk Ahn§, Jae Hong Jung*‡

*Department of Radiation Oncology, College of Medicine, Soonchunhyang University, Bucheon, Korea, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA, Department of Biomedical Engineering and Research Institute of Biomedical Engineering, The Catholic University, Seoul, §Department of Healthcare Convergence of Medical Informatics, Soonchunhyang University, Asan, Korea

Received: December 6, 2016; Revised: December 13, 2016; Accepted: December 24, 2016

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the patient setup errors of two different immobilization devices (Feet Fix: FF and Leg Fix: LF) for pelvic region radiotherapy in Tomotherapy. Thirty six-patients previously treated with IMRT technique were selected, and divided into two groups based on applied immobilization devices (FF versus LF). We performed a retrospective clinical analysis including the mean, systematic, random variation, 3D-error, and calculated the planning target volume (PTV) margin. In addition, a rotational error (angles, o) for each patient was analyzed using the automatic image registration. The 3D-errors for the FF and the LF groups were 3.70 mm and 4.26 mm, respectively; the LF group value was 15.1% higher than in the FF group. The treatment margin in the ML, SI, and AP directions were 5.23 mm (6.08 mm), 4.64 mm (6.29 mm), 5.83 mm (8.69 mm) in the FF group (and the LF group), respectively, that the FF group was lower than in the LF group. The percentage in treatment fractions for the FF group (ant the LF group) in greater than 5 mm at ML, SI, and AP direction was 1.7% (3.6%), 3.3% (10.7%), and 5.0% (16.1%), respectively. Two different immobilization devices were affected the patient setup errors due to different fixed location in low extremity. The radiotherapy for the pelvic region by Tomotherapy should be considering variation for the rotational angles including Yaw and Pitch direction that incorrect setup error during the treatment. In addition the choice of an appropriate immobilization device is important because an unalterable rotation angle affects the setup error.

KeywordsTomotherapy, Immobilization, Setup error, MVCT

Korean Society of Medical Physics

Vol.35 No.2
June 2024

pISSN 2508-4445
eISSN 2508-4453
Formerly ISSN 1226-5829

Frequency: Quarterly

Current Issue   |   Archives

Stats or Metrics

Share this article on :

  • line