Sameer Taneja PhD, David L. Barbee PhD, Richard F. Cohen MD, Martha Malin PhD
{"title":"实施用于临床电子模拟和治疗规划的立体摄像系统。","authors":"Sameer Taneja PhD, David L. Barbee PhD, Richard F. Cohen MD, Martha Malin PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.prro.2024.01.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>A 3-dimensinal (3D) stereoscopic camera system developed by .decimal was commissioned and implemented into the clinic to improve the efficiency of clinical electron simulations. Capabilities of the camera allowed simulations to be moved from the treatment vault into any room with a flat surface that could accommodate patient positioning devices, eliminating the need for clinical patient setup timeslots on the treatment machine. This work describes the process used for these simulations and compares the treatment parameters determined by the system to those used in delivery.</p></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><p>The Decimal3D scanner workflow consisted of: scanning the patient surface; contouring the treatment area; determining gantry, couch, collimator, and source-to-surface distance (SSD) parameters for en face entry of the beam with sufficient clearance at the machine; and ordering custom electron cutouts when needed. Transparencies showing the projection of in-house library cutouts at various clinical SSDs were created to assist in choosing an appropriate library cutout. Data from 73 treatment sites were analyzed to evaluate the accuracy of the scanner-determined beam parameters for each treatment delivery.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Clinical electron simulations for 73 treatment sites, predominately keloids, were transitioned out of the linear accelerator (LINAC) vault using the new workflow. For all patients, gantry, collimator, and couch parameters, along with SSD and cone size, were determined using the Decimal3D scanner with 57% of simulations using library cutouts. Tolerance tables for patient setup were updated to allow differences of 10, 20, and 5° for gantry, collimator, and couch, respectively. Approximately 7% of fractions (N = 181 total fractions) were set up outside of the tolerance table based on physician direction during treatment. This reflects physician preference to adjust the LINAC rather than patient position during treatment setup. No scanner-derived plan was untreatable because of cutout shape inaccuracy or clearance issues.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Clinical electron simulations were successfully transitioned out of the LINAC vault using the Decimal3D scanner without loss of setup accuracy, as measured through machine parameter determination and electron cutout shape.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":54245,"journal":{"name":"Practical Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementation of a Stereoscopic Camera System for Clinical Electron Simulation and Treatment Planning\",\"authors\":\"Sameer Taneja PhD, David L. Barbee PhD, Richard F. Cohen MD, Martha Malin PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.prro.2024.01.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>A 3-dimensinal (3D) stereoscopic camera system developed by .decimal was commissioned and implemented into the clinic to improve the efficiency of clinical electron simulations. Capabilities of the camera allowed simulations to be moved from the treatment vault into any room with a flat surface that could accommodate patient positioning devices, eliminating the need for clinical patient setup timeslots on the treatment machine. This work describes the process used for these simulations and compares the treatment parameters determined by the system to those used in delivery.</p></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><p>The Decimal3D scanner workflow consisted of: scanning the patient surface; contouring the treatment area; determining gantry, couch, collimator, and source-to-surface distance (SSD) parameters for en face entry of the beam with sufficient clearance at the machine; and ordering custom electron cutouts when needed. Transparencies showing the projection of in-house library cutouts at various clinical SSDs were created to assist in choosing an appropriate library cutout. Data from 73 treatment sites were analyzed to evaluate the accuracy of the scanner-determined beam parameters for each treatment delivery.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Clinical electron simulations for 73 treatment sites, predominately keloids, were transitioned out of the linear accelerator (LINAC) vault using the new workflow. For all patients, gantry, collimator, and couch parameters, along with SSD and cone size, were determined using the Decimal3D scanner with 57% of simulations using library cutouts. Tolerance tables for patient setup were updated to allow differences of 10, 20, and 5° for gantry, collimator, and couch, respectively. Approximately 7% of fractions (N = 181 total fractions) were set up outside of the tolerance table based on physician direction during treatment. This reflects physician preference to adjust the LINAC rather than patient position during treatment setup. No scanner-derived plan was untreatable because of cutout shape inaccuracy or clearance issues.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Clinical electron simulations were successfully transitioned out of the LINAC vault using the Decimal3D scanner without loss of setup accuracy, as measured through machine parameter determination and electron cutout shape.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54245,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Practical Radiation Oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Practical Radiation Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1879850024000341\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Practical Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1879850024000341","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Implementation of a Stereoscopic Camera System for Clinical Electron Simulation and Treatment Planning
Purpose
A 3-dimensinal (3D) stereoscopic camera system developed by .decimal was commissioned and implemented into the clinic to improve the efficiency of clinical electron simulations. Capabilities of the camera allowed simulations to be moved from the treatment vault into any room with a flat surface that could accommodate patient positioning devices, eliminating the need for clinical patient setup timeslots on the treatment machine. This work describes the process used for these simulations and compares the treatment parameters determined by the system to those used in delivery.
Methods and Materials
The Decimal3D scanner workflow consisted of: scanning the patient surface; contouring the treatment area; determining gantry, couch, collimator, and source-to-surface distance (SSD) parameters for en face entry of the beam with sufficient clearance at the machine; and ordering custom electron cutouts when needed. Transparencies showing the projection of in-house library cutouts at various clinical SSDs were created to assist in choosing an appropriate library cutout. Data from 73 treatment sites were analyzed to evaluate the accuracy of the scanner-determined beam parameters for each treatment delivery.
Results
Clinical electron simulations for 73 treatment sites, predominately keloids, were transitioned out of the linear accelerator (LINAC) vault using the new workflow. For all patients, gantry, collimator, and couch parameters, along with SSD and cone size, were determined using the Decimal3D scanner with 57% of simulations using library cutouts. Tolerance tables for patient setup were updated to allow differences of 10, 20, and 5° for gantry, collimator, and couch, respectively. Approximately 7% of fractions (N = 181 total fractions) were set up outside of the tolerance table based on physician direction during treatment. This reflects physician preference to adjust the LINAC rather than patient position during treatment setup. No scanner-derived plan was untreatable because of cutout shape inaccuracy or clearance issues.
Conclusions
Clinical electron simulations were successfully transitioned out of the LINAC vault using the Decimal3D scanner without loss of setup accuracy, as measured through machine parameter determination and electron cutout shape.
期刊介绍:
The overarching mission of Practical Radiation Oncology is to improve the quality of radiation oncology practice. PRO''s purpose is to document the state of current practice, providing background for those in training and continuing education for practitioners, through discussion and illustration of new techniques, evaluation of current practices, and publication of case reports. PRO strives to provide its readers content that emphasizes knowledge "with a purpose." The content of PRO includes:
Original articles focusing on patient safety, quality measurement, or quality improvement initiatives
Original articles focusing on imaging, contouring, target delineation, simulation, treatment planning, immobilization, organ motion, and other practical issues
ASTRO guidelines, position papers, and consensus statements
Essays that highlight enriching personal experiences in caring for cancer patients and their families.