PMID- 21844853
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20120105
LR  - 20211020
IS  - 1526-9914 (Electronic)
IS  - 1526-9914 (Linking)
VI  - 12
IP  - 3
DP  - 2011 Jan 31
TI  - Initial experience and clinical comparison of two image guidance methods for SBRT 
      treatment: 4DCT versus respiratory-triggered imaging.
PG  - 3429
AB  - For Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) treatment of lung and liver, we 
      quantified the differences between two image guidance methods: 4DCT and ExacTrac 
      respiratory-triggered imaging. Five different patients with five liver lesions 
      and one lung lesion for a total of 19 SBRT delivered fractions were studied. For 
      the 4DCT method, a manual registration process was used between the 4DCT image 
      sets from initial simulation and treatment day to determine the required daily 
      image-guided corrections. We also used the ExacTrac respiratory-triggered imaging 
      capability to verify the target positioning, and calculated the differences in 
      image guidance shifts between these two methods. The mean (standard deviation) of 
      the observed differences in image-guided shifts between 4DCT and ExacTrac 
      respiratory-triggered image guidance was left/right (L/R) = 0.4 (2.0) mm, 
      anterior/posterior (A/P) = 1.4 (1.7) mm, superior/inferior (S/I) = 2.2 (2.0) mm, 
      with no difference larger than 5.0 mm in any given direction for any individual 
      case. The largest error occurred in the S/I direction, with a mean of 2.2 mm for 
      the six lesions. This seems reasonable, because respiratory motion and the 
      resulting imaging uncertainties are most pronounced in this S/I direction. Image 
      guidance shifts derived from ExacTrac triggered imaging at two extreme breathing 
      phases (i.e., full exhale vs. full inhale), agreed well (less than 2.0 mm) with 
      each other. In summary, two very promising image guidance methods of 4DCT and 
      ExacTrac respiratory-triggered imaging were presented and the image guidance 
      shifts were comparable for the patients evaluated in this study.
FAU - Wang, Brian
AU  - Wang B
AD  - Department of Radiation Oncology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, 
      Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA. brian.wang@hci.utah.edu
FAU - Rassiah-Szegedi, Prema
AU  - Rassiah-Szegedi P
FAU - Zhao, Hui
AU  - Zhao H
FAU - Huang, Y Jessica
AU  - Huang YJ
FAU - Sarkar, Vikren
AU  - Sarkar V
FAU - Szegedi, Martin
AU  - Szegedi M
FAU - Kokeny, Kristine E
AU  - Kokeny KE
FAU - Anker, Christopher J
AU  - Anker CJ
FAU - Shrieve, Dennis C
AU  - Shrieve DC
FAU - Salter, Bill J
AU  - Salter BJ
LA  - eng
PT  - Comparative Study
PT  - Evaluation Study
PT  - Journal Article
DEP - 20110131
PL  - United States
TA  - J Appl Clin Med Phys
JT  - Journal of applied clinical medical physics
JID - 101089176
SB  - IM
MH  - Female
MH  - Four-Dimensional Computed Tomography/*methods
MH  - Humans
MH  - Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted/*methods
MH  - Lung Neoplasms/*diagnostic imaging/pathology/surgery
MH  - Male
MH  - Motion
MH  - Radiosurgery/*methods
MH  - Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted/*methods
MH  - *Respiratory Mechanics
MH  - Sensitivity and Specificity
PMC - PMC5718634
EDAT- 2011/08/17 06:00
MHDA- 2012/01/06 06:00
PMCR- 2011/01/31
CRDT- 2011/08/17 06:00
PHST- 2010/08/12 00:00 [received]
PHST- 2011/01/28 00:00 [accepted]
PHST- 2011/01/31 00:00 [revised]
PHST- 2011/08/17 06:00 [entrez]
PHST- 2011/08/17 06:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2012/01/06 06:00 [medline]
PHST- 2011/01/31 00:00 [pmc-release]
AID - ACM20257 [pii]
AID - 10.1120/jacmp.v12i3.3429 [doi]
PST - epublish
SO  - J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2011 Jan 31;12(3):3429. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v12i3.3429.