Efficacy of a thermoplastic mask and pneumatic abdominal compression device for immobilization in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy of spine metastases.
IF 2 4区 医学Q3 RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING
Yohan A Walter, Daniel B Speir, William E Burrell, Chiachien J Wang, Hsinshun T Wu
{"title":"Efficacy of a thermoplastic mask and pneumatic abdominal compression device for immobilization in stereotactic ablative radiotherapy of spine metastases.","authors":"Yohan A Walter, Daniel B Speir, William E Burrell, Chiachien J Wang, Hsinshun T Wu","doi":"10.1002/acm2.14577","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) has become a key technique in management of spine metastases. With improved control over treatment plan dosimetry, there is a greater need for accurate patient positioning to guarantee agreement between the treatment plan and delivered dose. With serious potential complications such as fracture and myelopathy, the margins of error in SABR of the spine are minimal. In this study, we assessed the performance of two patient immobilization setups in SABR for spinal metastases. First, a Type-S head and shoulders mask (CQ Medical, Avondale, PA), and second, the BPL1 setup, which includes a wing board, vacuum bag, and the Respiratory Belt for the Body Pro-Lok ONE (CQ Medical, Avondale, PA). Immobilization was assessed using image-guided intrafraction repositioning shifts. Required planning target volume (PTV) margins were calculated based on repositioning data for 172 treated fractions using 2 standard deviation (2SD) and analytic approaches. Overall, 91.7% and 74.1% of fractions treated had total 3D repositioning shifts ≤3.0 mm using the Type-S and BPL1 setups, respectively. In the thoracic spine, 43.2% and 46.5% of fractions had shifts ≤1.5 mm for the respective setups. Suggested margins were under 3.5 mm in all directions and use cases. In the posterior-anterior direction, the BPL1 setup had a 0.6 mm smaller suggested margin for the thoracic spine compared to the Type-S setup, at 1.4 mm, calculated using the analytic approach. Both the Type-S and BPL1 setups are effective for immobilization in spine SABR. The Type-S demonstrated superior immobilization in the upper spine and remains the clinical standard for cervical and upper thoracic spine positioning. The BPL1 setup showed effective immobilization in use cases treating the mid-to lower thoracic spine and lumbar spine and remains our clinical standard for those use cases. Results additionally demonstrate feasibility of potential PTV margin reduction.</p>","PeriodicalId":14989,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","volume":" ","pages":"e14577"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.14577","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"RADIOLOGY, NUCLEAR MEDICINE & MEDICAL IMAGING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) has become a key technique in management of spine metastases. With improved control over treatment plan dosimetry, there is a greater need for accurate patient positioning to guarantee agreement between the treatment plan and delivered dose. With serious potential complications such as fracture and myelopathy, the margins of error in SABR of the spine are minimal. In this study, we assessed the performance of two patient immobilization setups in SABR for spinal metastases. First, a Type-S head and shoulders mask (CQ Medical, Avondale, PA), and second, the BPL1 setup, which includes a wing board, vacuum bag, and the Respiratory Belt for the Body Pro-Lok ONE (CQ Medical, Avondale, PA). Immobilization was assessed using image-guided intrafraction repositioning shifts. Required planning target volume (PTV) margins were calculated based on repositioning data for 172 treated fractions using 2 standard deviation (2SD) and analytic approaches. Overall, 91.7% and 74.1% of fractions treated had total 3D repositioning shifts ≤3.0 mm using the Type-S and BPL1 setups, respectively. In the thoracic spine, 43.2% and 46.5% of fractions had shifts ≤1.5 mm for the respective setups. Suggested margins were under 3.5 mm in all directions and use cases. In the posterior-anterior direction, the BPL1 setup had a 0.6 mm smaller suggested margin for the thoracic spine compared to the Type-S setup, at 1.4 mm, calculated using the analytic approach. Both the Type-S and BPL1 setups are effective for immobilization in spine SABR. The Type-S demonstrated superior immobilization in the upper spine and remains the clinical standard for cervical and upper thoracic spine positioning. The BPL1 setup showed effective immobilization in use cases treating the mid-to lower thoracic spine and lumbar spine and remains our clinical standard for those use cases. Results additionally demonstrate feasibility of potential PTV margin reduction.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics is an international Open Access publication dedicated to clinical medical physics. JACMP welcomes original contributions dealing with all aspects of medical physics from scientists working in the clinical medical physics around the world. JACMP accepts only online submission.
JACMP will publish:
-Original Contributions: Peer-reviewed, investigations that represent new and significant contributions to the field. Recommended word count: up to 7500.
-Review Articles: Reviews of major areas or sub-areas in the field of clinical medical physics. These articles may be of any length and are peer reviewed.
-Technical Notes: These should be no longer than 3000 words, including key references.
-Letters to the Editor: Comments on papers published in JACMP or on any other matters of interest to clinical medical physics. These should not be more than 1250 (including the literature) and their publication is only based on the decision of the editor, who occasionally asks experts on the merit of the contents.
-Book Reviews: The editorial office solicits Book Reviews.
-Announcements of Forthcoming Meetings: The Editor may provide notice of forthcoming meetings, course offerings, and other events relevant to clinical medical physics.
-Parallel Opposed Editorial: We welcome topics relevant to clinical practice and medical physics profession. The contents can be controversial debate or opposed aspects of an issue. One author argues for the position and the other against. Each side of the debate contains an opening statement up to 800 words, followed by a rebuttal up to 500 words. Readers interested in participating in this series should contact the moderator with a proposed title and a short description of the topic