International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics
Physics contributionPositioning accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography in combination with a HexaPOD robot treatment table
Introduction
Recent improvements in radiotherapy planning and delivery (1, 2) have made it possible to achieve highly conformal dose distributions that can, in theory, be delivered with a very high degree of geometrical accuracy. However, temporal changes in the patient’s anatomy, i.e., inter- and intrafractional organ motion, and patient setup errors (3) result in blurring of the planned dose distribution, i.e., the slope of the dose gradients become shallower (4, 5, 6). The deviation from the planned dose distribution may lead to suboptimal dose coverage on the edge of the tumor or to increased dose to the critical structures. This can lead to a reduction in local tumor control and an increase in unwanted side effects. Therefore, patient setup verification is of paramount importance to minimize the above effects.
To ensure correct delivery, safety margins are applied (7) at the planning stage and the treatment fields are usually simulated before treatment on a treatment simulator. Typically, on the first day of treatment, and in short intervals thereafter, electronic portal images are acquired to verify the patient setup (8, 9). Because of the limited contrast in the images, it is often not possible to verify the position of the tumor itself but rather the position of surrogate landmarks, such as bony anatomy or other prominent structures, which may or may not be rigidly connected with the tumor. More sophisticated image-guided approaches that use three-dimensional volume information include mobile in-room computed tomography (CT) scanners (10), CT on rails (11, 12), B-mode ultrasound systems (13, 14), tomotherapy (15, 16), and kilo-voltage (17, 18) and mega-voltage (19, 20, 21) cone-beam CT scanners (CBCT). Furthermore, these imaging modalities are not restricted to assess the setup error based on the bony anatomy but offer image quality with sufficient soft-tissue contrast. This work focuses on the Elekta Synergy S (Elekta, Crawley, UK) accelerator with kilo-voltage CBCT, also referred to as the X-ray volume imaging (XVI) system.
The advantage of CBCT scanners for patient setup verification is that a complete set of volume information is acquired with a high resolution in all three dimensions. Acquisition of the CBCT study is carried out in the treatment position on the treatment table without the need for moving either the table or the patient. Image registration between the planning CT and the CBCT reveals full three-dimensional information regarding the difference in patient position, hence the tumor position, between the planning CT and the current position on the treatment table. It has been shown that with the XVI system subpixel size setup errors (22) can be correctly determined, which makes it suitable for treatments where high precision is indispensable, such as cranial stereotactic treatments. With XVI the setup error is expressed by means of three translational and three rotational correction vectors. Applying these six corrections accurately ensures that the tumor is treated as planned assuming no intrafractional organ movement. It has been noted by Sharpe et al. that in combination with XVI it is indeed the standard Elekta table that restricts the capacity to correct setup errors to a few tenths of a millimeter (23). In addition, standard treatment tables do not allow rotational corrections around the main translational axis except for isocentric table rotation. The approach discussed in this article utilizes a dedicated treatment table that permits automatic corrections in six degrees of freedom and therefore allows taking full advantage of the CBCT.
The HexaPOD treatment table from Medical Intelligence (Schwabmünchen, Germany) is a robotic carbon fiber table with six independent actuators capable of correcting setup errors in all six degrees of freedom (X, Y, Z, pitch, roll and yaw). The table positioning is computer-controlled via a personal computer outside the treatment room. The first combination of Elekta Synergy S with CBCT and the HexaPOD was installed at the University of Wuerzburg in June 2005. The aim of this study was to scrutinize the positioning accuracy and reproducibility of the HexaPOD in combination with the Synergy S cone-beam CT in a clinical environment.
Section snippets
Methods and materials
To establish a relationship to clinical applications, the head of the Alderson phantom (The Phantom Laboratory, Salem, NY) was used as a virtual test patient. The Alderson head phantom was rigidly fixated on the HexaPOD treatment table using a scotch cast wrapping mask and the Stryker-Leibinger stereotactic system (24) as shown in Fig. 1. A planning CT image study was acquired with 3-mm slice thickness on a Siemens Somatom Sensation Open 20 (Siemens, Forchheim, Germany) CT scanner. The image
Results
With the gray value match it was possible to exactly detect translational displacements as small as 0.1 mm in axial and in superior-inferior direction, with zero deviation in all six degrees of freedom. With the bone match a predefined displacement of 0.1 mm in axial direction (x) resulted in a correction vector in x, y, z, u, v, and w of 0.5 mm, −0.1 mm, 0.3 mm, −0.2°, −0.2°, and 0.1°, respectively, and in superior-inferior direction (y) of 0.1 mm, −0.1 mm, 0.3 mm, −0.3°, 0.4°, and 0°. For a
Discussion
Image-guided radiotherapy has regained popularity and attention in recent years. This can be attributed to the fact that it is now possible to deliver highly conformal dose distributions with a very high degree of geometrical and dosimetrical accuracy with either intensity-modulated radiotherapy or with stereotactic treatments. This has led to the development of new imaging approaches, such as CBCT, to ensure that the actual treatment deviates as little as possible from the planned treatment,
Conclusions
The positioning accuracy of the robotic HexaPOD in combination with the Elekta Synergy S CBCT was investigated. First, the reproducibility of image acquisition and image registration with the XVI software was determined for both bone and gray value match. Translational and rotational corrections with the HexaPOD as well as the combination of both were examined separately, and the resulting positioning errors were recorded. A submillimeter positioning accuracy was found in the translational axis
References (30)
- et al.
Magnitude and clinical relevance of translational and rotational patient setup errors: A cone-beam CT study
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2006) - et al.
The effect of breathing and set-up errors on the cumulative dose to a lung tumor
Radiother Oncol
(2001) Portal imaging technology: Past, present, and future
Semin Radiat Oncol
(1995)- et al.
Managing geometric uncertainty in conformal intensity-modulated radiation therapy
Semin Radiat Oncol
(1999) - et al.
In-room CT techniques for image-guided radiation therapy
Med Dosim
(2006) - et al.
CT image-guided intensity-modulated therapy for paraspinal tumors using stereotactic immobilization
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2003) - et al.
Evaluation of ultrasound-based prostate localization for image-guided radiotherapy
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2003) - et al.
The utility of megavoltage computed tomography images from a helical tomotherapy system for setup verification purposes
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2004) - et al.
Flat-panel cone-beam computed tomography for image-guided radiation therapy
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
(2002) - et al.
Cone-beam-CT guided radiation therapy: Technical implementation
Radiother Oncol
(2005)
A cone-beam megavoltage CT scanner for treatment verification in conformal radiotherapy
Radiother Oncol
Low-dose megavoltage cone-beam CT for radiation therapy
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
Stereotactic intensity modulated radiation therapy and inverse treatment planning for tumors of the head and neck region: Clinical implementation of the step and shoot approach and first clinical results
Radiother Oncol
Automatic prostate localization on cone-beam CT scans for high precision image-guided radiotherapy
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys
Intensity-modulated radiation therapy
Cited by (118)
ESTRO ACROP guideline for target volume delineation of skull base tumors
2021, Radiotherapy and OncologyCitation Excerpt :Dose conformity is improved using IMRT and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques [44]. Patients are usually immobilized in a high precision frameless stereotactic mask fixation system and submillimeter accuracy of patient positioning in the treatment room is achieved using modern image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) technologies, such as orthogonal x-rays (ExacTrac®Xray 6D system) or cone beam CT (CBCT) [34–38]. For patients with large complex skull base tumors receiving conventionally fractionated SRT, IMRT and VMAT planning techniques are increasingly being used over 3D conformal RT because of its better target coverage and OARs sparing, although at the cost of larger volumes receiving low dose radiation.
Clinical paradigms and challenges in surface guided radiation therapy: Where do we go from here?
2020, Radiotherapy and OncologyThe influence of a six degrees of freedom couch and an individual head support in patient positioning in radiotherapy of head and neck cancer
2019, Physics and Imaging in Radiation OncologyCitation Excerpt :The 6DOF couch provides optimal patient position correction. Nowadays, this type of couch is increasingly used and is considered state of the art care [5,14–16,20]. It is able to achieve submillimetre positioning accuracy [20].
Distortion verification of helical computed tomography for image-guided radiotherapy
2023, Journal of Radiotherapy in PracticeComparative analysis of setup margin calculation in cone beam CT, by van Herk formula, using two different image registration methods
2023, Journal of Radiotherapy in PracticeEvaluation of the accuracy of a six-degree-of-freedom robotic couch using optical surface and cone beam CT images of an SRS QA phantom
2023, Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice
This work was partially supported by a grant from the Bayerische Forschungsstiftung, Germany and Elekta Oncology Systems, Crawley, UK.
Conflict of interest: none.