Dosimetric Evaluation of Commercially Available Flat vs. Self-Produced 3D-Conformal Silicone Boluses for the Head and Neck Region.

3D conformal silicone bolus 3D printer flat silicone bolus fused deposition modeling (FDM) head and neck cancer individual silicone bolus surface dose measurement volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT)

Journal

Frontiers in oncology
ISSN: 2234-943X
Titre abrégé: Front Oncol
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101568867

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2022
Historique:
received: 22 02 2022
accepted: 21 06 2022
entrez: 29 8 2022
pubmed: 30 8 2022
medline: 30 8 2022
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Boluses are routinely used in radiotherapy to modify surface doses. Nevertheless, considerable dose discrepancies may occur in some cases due to fit inaccuracy of commercially available standard flat boluses. Moreover, due to the simple geometric design of conventional boluses, also surrounding healthy skin areas may be unintentionally covered, resulting in the unwanted dose buildup. With the fused deposition modeling (FDM) technique, there is a simple and possibly cost-effective way to solve these problems in routine clinical practice. This paper presents a procedure of self-manufacturing bespoke patient-specific silicone boluses and the evaluation of buildup and fit accuracy in comparison to standard rectangular commercially available silicone boluses. 3D-conformal silicone boluses were custom-built to cover the surgical scar region of 25 patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy of head and neck cancer at the University Hospital Würzburg. During a standard CT-based planning procedure, a 5-mm-thick 3D bolus contour was generated to cover the radiopaque marked surgical scar with an additional safety margin. From these digital contours, molds were 3D printed and poured with silicone. Dose measurements for both types of boluses were performed with radiochromic films (EBT3) at three points per patient-at least one aimed to be in the high-dose area (scar) and one in the lower-dose area (spared healthy skin). Surface-bolus distance, which ideally should not be present, was determined from cone-beam CT performed for positioning control. The dosimetric influence of surface-bolus distance was also determined on slab phantom for different field sizes. The trial was performed with hardware that may be routinely available in every radiotherapy department, with the exception of the 3D printer. The required number of patients was determined based on the results of preparatory measurements with the help of the statistical consultancy of the University of Würzburg. The number of measuring points represents the total number of patients. In the high-dose area of the scar, there was a significantly better intended dose buildup of 2.45% (95%CI 0.0014-0.0477, p = 0.038, N = 30) in favor of a 3D-conformal bolus. Median distances between the body surface and bolus differed significantly between 3D-conformal and commercially available boluses (3.5 vs. 7.9 mm, p = 0.001). The surface dose at the slab phantom did not differ between commercially available and 3D-conformal boluses. Increasing the surface-bolus distance from 5 to 10 mm decreased the surface dose by approximately 2% and 11% in the 6 × 6- and 3 × 3-cm Using 3D-conformal boluses allows a comparison to the commercially available boluses' dose buildup in the covered areas. Smaller field size is prone to a larger surface-bolus distance effect. Higher conformity of 3D-conformal boluses reduces this effect. This may be especially relevant for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques with a huge number of smaller fields. High conformity of 3D-conformal boluses reduces an unintended dose buildup in healthy skin. The limiting factor in the conformity of 3D-conformal boluses in our setting was the immobilization mask, which was produced primarily for the 3D boluses. The mask itself limited tight contact of subsequently produced 3D-conformal boluses to the mask-covered body areas. In this respect, bolus adjustment before mask fabrication will be done in the future setting.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
Boluses are routinely used in radiotherapy to modify surface doses. Nevertheless, considerable dose discrepancies may occur in some cases due to fit inaccuracy of commercially available standard flat boluses. Moreover, due to the simple geometric design of conventional boluses, also surrounding healthy skin areas may be unintentionally covered, resulting in the unwanted dose buildup. With the fused deposition modeling (FDM) technique, there is a simple and possibly cost-effective way to solve these problems in routine clinical practice. This paper presents a procedure of self-manufacturing bespoke patient-specific silicone boluses and the evaluation of buildup and fit accuracy in comparison to standard rectangular commercially available silicone boluses.
Methods UNASSIGNED
3D-conformal silicone boluses were custom-built to cover the surgical scar region of 25 patients who received adjuvant radiotherapy of head and neck cancer at the University Hospital Würzburg. During a standard CT-based planning procedure, a 5-mm-thick 3D bolus contour was generated to cover the radiopaque marked surgical scar with an additional safety margin. From these digital contours, molds were 3D printed and poured with silicone. Dose measurements for both types of boluses were performed with radiochromic films (EBT3) at three points per patient-at least one aimed to be in the high-dose area (scar) and one in the lower-dose area (spared healthy skin). Surface-bolus distance, which ideally should not be present, was determined from cone-beam CT performed for positioning control. The dosimetric influence of surface-bolus distance was also determined on slab phantom for different field sizes. The trial was performed with hardware that may be routinely available in every radiotherapy department, with the exception of the 3D printer. The required number of patients was determined based on the results of preparatory measurements with the help of the statistical consultancy of the University of Würzburg. The number of measuring points represents the total number of patients.
Results UNASSIGNED
In the high-dose area of the scar, there was a significantly better intended dose buildup of 2.45% (95%CI 0.0014-0.0477, p = 0.038, N = 30) in favor of a 3D-conformal bolus. Median distances between the body surface and bolus differed significantly between 3D-conformal and commercially available boluses (3.5 vs. 7.9 mm, p = 0.001). The surface dose at the slab phantom did not differ between commercially available and 3D-conformal boluses. Increasing the surface-bolus distance from 5 to 10 mm decreased the surface dose by approximately 2% and 11% in the 6 × 6- and 3 × 3-cm
Conclusions UNASSIGNED
Using 3D-conformal boluses allows a comparison to the commercially available boluses' dose buildup in the covered areas. Smaller field size is prone to a larger surface-bolus distance effect. Higher conformity of 3D-conformal boluses reduces this effect. This may be especially relevant for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques with a huge number of smaller fields. High conformity of 3D-conformal boluses reduces an unintended dose buildup in healthy skin. The limiting factor in the conformity of 3D-conformal boluses in our setting was the immobilization mask, which was produced primarily for the 3D boluses. The mask itself limited tight contact of subsequently produced 3D-conformal boluses to the mask-covered body areas. In this respect, bolus adjustment before mask fabrication will be done in the future setting.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36033533
doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.881439
pmc: PMC9399510
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

881439

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Pollmann, Toussaint, Flentje, Wegener and Lewitzki.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Références

J Radiat Res. 2020 Nov 16;61(6):920-928
pubmed: 32960262
Med Phys. 2000 May;27(5):1011-7
pubmed: 10841404
PLoS One. 2017 May 11;12(5):e0177562
pubmed: 28494012
Phys Med Biol. 2006 Nov 21;51(22):5937-50
pubmed: 17068375
Phys Med. 2018 Nov;55:82-87
pubmed: 30471824
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014 Jul 08;15(4):4831
pubmed: 25207410
Med Dosim. 2021 Summer;46(2):157-163
pubmed: 33172711
Australas Phys Eng Sci Med. 2007 Jun;30(2):111-9
pubmed: 17682400
Biomed Phys Eng Express. 2020 May 29;6(4):045014
pubmed: 33444275
Can Vet J. 2020 Jun;61(6):638-644
pubmed: 32675816
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019 Jan;20(1):348-355
pubmed: 30402935
J Radiat Res. 2022 May 18;63(3):428-434
pubmed: 35420693
PLoS One. 2016 Dec 8;11(12):e0168063
pubmed: 27930717
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018 Jan;19(1):115-124
pubmed: 29159920
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022 Apr;23(4):e13538
pubmed: 35084098
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2003 Autumn;4(4):321-33
pubmed: 14604422
Radiother Oncol. 2016 Oct;121(1):148-153
pubmed: 27475278
Phys Med. 2017 Jun;38:1-9
pubmed: 28610688
Med Phys. 1993 Mar-Apr;20(2 Pt 1):377-8
pubmed: 8497226
Curr Med Imaging. 2021;17(7):820-831
pubmed: 33530912
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018 May;19(3):32-43
pubmed: 29575596
Med Dosim. 2017 Summer;42(2):150-155
pubmed: 28495033

Auteurs

Stephan Pollmann (S)

University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.

André Toussaint (A)

University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.

Michael Flentje (M)

University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.

Sonja Wegener (S)

University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.

Victor Lewitzki (V)

University Hospital Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.

Classifications MeSH