Potentials of on-line repositioning based on implanted fiducial markers and electronic portal imaging in prostate cancer radiotherapy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To evaluate the benefit of an on-line correction protocol based on implanted markers and weekly portal imaging in external beam radiotherapy of prostate cancer. To compare the use of bony anatomy versus implanted markers for calculat...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Boehmer Dirk, Budach Volker, Wust Peter, Graf Reinhold
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2009-04-01
Series:Radiation Oncology
Online Access:http://www.ro-journal.com/content/4/1/13
Description
Summary:<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To evaluate the benefit of an on-line correction protocol based on implanted markers and weekly portal imaging in external beam radiotherapy of prostate cancer. To compare the use of bony anatomy versus implanted markers for calculation of setup-error plus/minus prostate movement. To estimate the error reduction (and the corresponding margin reduction) by reducing the total error to 3 mm once a week, three times per week or every treatment day.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>23 patients had three to five, 2.5 mm Ø spherical gold markers transrectally inserted into the prostate before radiotherapy. Verification and correction of treatment position by analysis of orthogonal portal images was performed on a weekly basis. We registered with respect to the bony contours (setup error) and to the marker position (prostate motion) and determined the total error. The systematic and random errors are specified. Positioning correction was applied with a threshold of 5 mm displacement.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The systematic error (1 standard deviation [SD]) in left-right (LR), superior-inferior (SI) and anterior-posterior (AP) direction contributes for the setup 1.6 mm, 2.1 mm and 2.4 mm and for prostate motion 1.1 mm, 1.9 mm and 2.3 mm. The random error (1 SD) in LR, SI and AP direction amounts for the setup 2.3 mm, 2.7 mm and 2.7 mm and for motion 1.4 mm, 2.3 mm and 2.7 mm. The resulting total error suggests margins of 7.0 mm (LR), 9.5 mm (SI) and 9.5 mm (AP) between clinical target volume (CTV) and planning target volume (PTV). After correction once a week the margins were lowered to 6.7, 8.2 and 8.7 mm and furthermore down to 4.9, 5.1 and 4.8 mm after correcting every treatment day.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Prostate movement relative to adjacent bony anatomy is significant and contributes substantially to the target position variability. Performing on-line setup correction using implanted radioopaque markers and megavoltage radiography results in reduced treatment margins depending on the online imaging protocol (once a week or more frequently).</p>
ISSN:1748-717X