Comparison among four immobilization devices for whole breast irradiation with Helical Tomotherapy.
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Breast
/ diagnostic imaging
Breast Neoplasms
/ diagnostic imaging
Cohort Studies
Dose Fractionation, Radiation
Female
Humans
Middle Aged
Patient Positioning
Radiotherapy Dosage
Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted
/ instrumentation
Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated
/ instrumentation
Breast cancer
Immobilisation device
Tomotherapy
Journal
Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics (AIFB)
ISSN: 1724-191X
Titre abrégé: Phys Med
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 9302888
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2020
Jan 2020
Historique:
received:
29
08
2019
revised:
30
11
2019
accepted:
23
12
2019
pubmed:
10
1
2020
medline:
27
10
2020
entrez:
10
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To evaluate the repositioning accuracy of 4 immobilization devices (ID) used for whole breast Helical Tomotherapy treatments: arm float with VacFix® (Par Scientific, Denmark), all-in-one® (AIO®) system (Orfit, Belgium), MacroCast thermoplastic mask (Macromedics, The Netherlands) and BlueBag® system with Arm-Shuttle (Elekta, Sweden). Twenty four women with breast cancer with PTV including the breast/chest wall and lymph nodes were involved in this study (6 women per group). Pretreatment registration results were first collected using automatic bone registration + manual adjustment on the vertebra followed by independent registrations on different ROIs representing each treated area (axillary, mammary chain, clavicular, breast/chest wall). The differences in translations and rotations between reference registration and the above mentionned ROIs were calculated. A total of 120 MVCT images were analyzed. Significant differences were found between IDs (p < 0.0001), ROIs (p = 0.0002) and the session number (p < 0.0001) on the observed shifts, when examining 3D translation vectors. 3D-vectors were significantly lower for the BlueBag® than for the VacFix® or for the AIO® (p < 0.0001), but differences were not significant compared to the mask (p = 0.674). Finally, setup margins were overall smaller for the BlueBag® than for other IDs, with values ranging from 1.53 to 1.91 mm on the mammary chain area, 4.52-6.07 mm on the clavicular area, 2.71-4.62 mm on the axillary area, and 3.39-5.10 mm on the breast. We demonstrated in this study that the BlueBag® combined with arm shuttle is a robust solution for breast and nodes immobilization during HT treatments.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31918372
pii: S1120-1797(19)30544-7
doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2019.12.023
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
205-211Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2019 Associazione Italiana di Fisica Medica. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.