Sankar Venkataraman, Michael Abdalmassih, Nikesh Hanumanthappa, Vibhay Pareek, Rashi Kulshrestha, Pascal Lambert, Srinivas Rathod, Jim Butler, Arbind Dubey
{"title":"A retrospective study on clinical factors influencing intra-fraction motion using volumetric imaging for spine stereotactic body radiotherapy.","authors":"Sankar Venkataraman, Michael Abdalmassih, Nikesh Hanumanthappa, Vibhay Pareek, Rashi Kulshrestha, Pascal Lambert, Srinivas Rathod, Jim Butler, Arbind Dubey","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for the spine is challenging due to high-dose gradients sparing the cord in the treatment plans. We present our findings of initial setup error and intrafraction motion from Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>A total of 47 patients treated with spine SBRT with a total of 154 fractions following a fractionation schedule of 16 Gy in 1, 24 Gy in 2, and 30 Gy in 5 fractions were part of this study. Pre-treatment CBCT was used for localization of the target and couch shifts were applied based on target volume matching to the planning CT image set. Post-treatment CBCT was acquired for all fractions. Intrafraction motion (IFM) was calculated by matching post-treatment CBCT to planning CT for the target volume.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average Intrafraction motion was 1.6 ± 0.9 mm for the study cohort. The average and standard deviation of intrafraction motion were 0.4 ± 1.1 (AP), 0.3 ± 0.9 (SI) and 0.2 ± 1.2 (RL) respectively. The average Initial setup error tabulated from the offline review showed a mean value of 7.8 ± 5.3 mm. The average and standard deviation of the initial setup error were 2.5 ± 5.5 (AP), 2.4 ± 5.3(SI), and 0.8 ± 4.5(RL) respectively. The correlation of intrafraction motion with body mass index (BMI) and the number of consecutive vertebrae levels did not show any statistical significance, however, there was a significant association with gender as women showed more IFM.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our study on intrafraction motion from CBCT images reinforced the importance of immobilization and imaging for positioning spine SBRT patients.</p><p><strong>Advances in knowledge: </strong>The need for CBCT and imagining for positional errors is emphasized while treating with SBRT spine and the need for proper immobilization techniques.</p>","PeriodicalId":16917,"journal":{"name":"Journal of radiosurgery and SBRT","volume":"8 4","pages":"305-312"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10322170/pdf/rsbrt-8-305.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of radiosurgery and SBRT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for the spine is challenging due to high-dose gradients sparing the cord in the treatment plans. We present our findings of initial setup error and intrafraction motion from Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) imaging.
Materials and methods: A total of 47 patients treated with spine SBRT with a total of 154 fractions following a fractionation schedule of 16 Gy in 1, 24 Gy in 2, and 30 Gy in 5 fractions were part of this study. Pre-treatment CBCT was used for localization of the target and couch shifts were applied based on target volume matching to the planning CT image set. Post-treatment CBCT was acquired for all fractions. Intrafraction motion (IFM) was calculated by matching post-treatment CBCT to planning CT for the target volume.
Results: The average Intrafraction motion was 1.6 ± 0.9 mm for the study cohort. The average and standard deviation of intrafraction motion were 0.4 ± 1.1 (AP), 0.3 ± 0.9 (SI) and 0.2 ± 1.2 (RL) respectively. The average Initial setup error tabulated from the offline review showed a mean value of 7.8 ± 5.3 mm. The average and standard deviation of the initial setup error were 2.5 ± 5.5 (AP), 2.4 ± 5.3(SI), and 0.8 ± 4.5(RL) respectively. The correlation of intrafraction motion with body mass index (BMI) and the number of consecutive vertebrae levels did not show any statistical significance, however, there was a significant association with gender as women showed more IFM.
Conclusions: Our study on intrafraction motion from CBCT images reinforced the importance of immobilization and imaging for positioning spine SBRT patients.
Advances in knowledge: The need for CBCT and imagining for positional errors is emphasized while treating with SBRT spine and the need for proper immobilization techniques.