6D image guidance for spinal non-invasive stereotactic body radiation therapy: Comparison between ExacTrac X-ray 6D with kilo-voltage cone-beam CT

Chang, Zheng; Wang, Zhiheng; Ma, Jinli; O’Daniel, J; Kirkpatrick, John P.; Yin, Fang‐Fang

doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2009.12.036

Cited by 71 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Residual setup errors reported by Ma et al [10] and Chang et al [12] were comparable to those found in our study. The factors in the translational dimension that were statistically significant were the lateral (x-axis) and vertical (y-axis) dimensions between the 6D ExacTrac and the 3D CBCT, the longitudinal dimension between the 6D ExacTrac and the 6D CBCT, and the lateral (x-axis) dimension between the 3D CBCT and the 6D CBCT.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Hypo-fractionated radiotherapy can be administered in 2–5 fractions if the size of the tumor is too large or the dose is above the limit radiation dose to surrounding normal organs [6], [7]. With sophisticated radiation treatment techniques such as SRS and hypo-fractionated radiotherapy, imaging guidance systems, such as ExacTrac (BrainLAB, Feldkirchen, Germany) and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT; Varian Medical System, CA, USA; Elekta Oncology System, Crawley, UK) are indispensable, as they improve the accuracy of patient localization setup and tumor targeting in contouring [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluations of the setup discrepancy between BrainLAB 6D ExacTrac and cone-beam computed tomography used with the imaging guidance system Novalis-Tx for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Park

Yea

et al. 2017

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study was to evaluate the setup discrepancy between BrainLAB 6 degree-of-freedom (6D) ExacTrac and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) used with the imaging guidance system Novalis Tx for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery. We included 107 consecutive patients for whom white stereotactic head frame masks (R408; Clarity Medical Products, Newark, OH) were used to fix the head during intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery, between August 2012 and July 2016. The patients were immobilized in the same state for both the verification image using 6D ExacTrac and online 3D CBCT. In addition, after radiation treatment, registration between the computed tomography simulation images and the CBCT images was performed with offline 6D fusion in an offline review. The root-mean-square of the difference in the translational dimensions between the ExacTrac system and CBCT was <1.01 mm for online matching and <1.10 mm for offline matching. Furthermore, the root-mean-square of the difference in the rotational dimensions between the ExacTrac system and the CBCT were <0.82° for online matching and <0.95° for offline matching. It was concluded that while the discrepancies in residual setup errors between the ExacTrac 6D X-ray and the CBCT were minor, they should not be ignored.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluations of the setup discrepancy between BrainLAB 6D ExacTrac and cone-beam computed tomography used with the imaging guidance system Novalis-Tx for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Park

Yea

et al. 2017

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For this purpose, different imageguidance methods are applied in order to minimize the geometric targeting error. While, initially, fiducial implants were required for image-guidance [2], current technology alternatively uses the skeletal structure of the spine as positional reference [3][4][5].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Feasibility of fiducial-free prone-position treatments with CyberKnife for lower lumbar/sacral spine lesions

Fürweger¹,

Drexler²,

Kufeld³

et al. 2011

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Yaw (rotation along the vertical axis) and pitch (rotation along the lateral axis) are the frontal image rotation and lateral image rotation, respectively. However, because roll (rotation along the longitudinal axis) cannot be determined from the frontal and lateral DRs, a 2D–3D registration method 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 is needed. In this evaluation of patient positioning error, it is assumed that the rotation error is negligible and can be almost ignored because the measurements take place after the patient positioning has been completed, and the pointing technique is also used for evaluation only regarding the translation errors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For patient positioning research, CT–CT registration methods have been proposed using CT images or cone beam CT images, 1 , 2 , 3 2D–3D registration methods have been proposed using two‐directional X‐ray images, 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 and patient positioning systems that are fast and highly accurate are widely used. For patient positioning in particle therapy, the prescribed dose is not deposited to the target when the water‐equivalent path length (WEL) to the target changes, even if the target is positioned to the correct irradiation position using CT images 11 , 12 , 13 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of an automatic evaluation method for patient positioning error

Kubota

Tashiro

Shinohara

et al. 2015

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Highly accurate radiotherapy needs highly accurate patient positioning. At our facility, patient positioning is manually performed by radiology technicians. After the positioning, positioning error is measured by manually comparing some positions on a digital radiography image (DR) to the corresponding positions on a digitally reconstructed radiography image (DRR). This method is prone to error and can be time‐consuming because of its manual nature. Therefore, we propose an automated measuring method for positioning error to improve patient throughput and achieve higher reliability. The error between a position on the DR and a position on the DRR was calculated to determine the best matched position using the block‐matching method. The zero‐mean normalized cross‐correlation was used as our evaluation function, and the Gaussian weight function was used to increase importance as the pixel position approached the isocenter. The accuracy of the calculation method was evaluated using pelvic phantom images, and the method's effectiveness was evaluated on images of prostate cancer patients before the positioning, comparing them with the results of radiology technicians' measurements. The root mean square error (RMSE) of the calculation method for the pelvic phantom was 0.23±0.05 mm. The coefficients between the calculation method and the measurement results of the technicians were 0.989 for the phantom images and 0.980 for the patient images. The RMSE of the total evaluation results of positioning for prostate cancer patients using the calculation method was 0.32±0.18 mm. Using the proposed method, we successfully measured residual positioning errors. The accuracy and effectiveness of the method was evaluated for pelvic phantom images and images of prostate cancer patients. In the future, positioning for cancer patients at other sites will be evaluated using the calculation method. Consequently, we expect an improvement in treatment throughput for these other sites.PACS number: 87

show abstract

6D image guidance for spinal non-invasive stereotactic body radiation therapy: Comparison between ExacTrac X-ray 6D with kilo-voltage cone-beam CT

Cited by 71 publications

References 21 publications

Evaluations of the setup discrepancy between BrainLAB 6D ExacTrac and cone-beam computed tomography used with the imaging guidance system Novalis-Tx for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Evaluations of the setup discrepancy between BrainLAB 6D ExacTrac and cone-beam computed tomography used with the imaging guidance system Novalis-Tx for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery

Feasibility of fiducial-free prone-position treatments with CyberKnife for lower lumbar/sacral spine lesions

Development of an automatic evaluation method for patient positioning error

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About