Scopus Publication Detail
The publication detail shows the title, authors (with indicators showing other profiled authors), information on the publishing organization, abstract and a link to the article in Scopus. This abstract is what is used to create the fingerprint of the publication.
Localization accuracy and immobilization effectiveness of a stereotactic body frame for a variety of treatment sites
Ryan Foster; Jeffrey Meyer; Puneeth Iyengar; David Pistenmaa; Robert Timmerman; Hak Choy; Timothy Solberg(Profiled Authors: Hak Choy; Ryan D Foster; Puneeth Iyengar; Jeffrey J Meyer; David A Pistenmaa; Timothy D Solberg; Robert Timmerman)
International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 2013;87(5):911-916.Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study was to analyze the pretreatment setup errors and intrafraction motion using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for stereotactic body radiation therapy patients immobilized and localized with a stereotactic body frame for a variety of treatment sites. Methods and Materials Localization errors were recorded for patients receiving SBRT for 141 lung, 29 liver, 48 prostate, and 45 spine tumors representing 1005 total localization sessions. All patients were treated in a stereotactic body frame with a large custom-molded vacuum pillow. Patients were first localized to the frame using tattoos placed during simulation. Subsequently, the frame was aligned to the room lasers according to the stereotactic coordinates determined from the treatment plan. Every patient received a pretreatment and an intrafraction CBCT. Abdominal compression was used for all liver patients and for approximately 40% of the lung patients to reduce tumor motion due to respiration. Results The mean ± standard deviation pretreatment setup errors from all localizations were -2.44 ± 3.85, 1.31 ± 5.84, and 0.11 ± 3.76 mm in the anteroposterior, superoinferior, and lateral directions, respectively. The mean pretreatment localization results among all treatment sites were not significantly different (F test, P<.05). For all treatment sites, the mean ± standard deviation intrafraction shifts were 0.33 ± 1.34, 0.15 ± 1.45, and -0.02 ± 1.17 mm in the anteroposterior, superoinferior, and lateral directions, respectively. The mean unidimensional intrafraction shifts were statistically different for several of the comparisons (P<.05) as assessed by the Tukey-Kramer test. Conclusions Despite the varied tumor locations, the pretreatment mean localization errors for all sites were found to be consistent among the treatment sites and not significantly different, indicating that the body frame is a suitable immobilization and localization device for a variety of tumor sites. Our pretreatment localization errors and intrafraction shifts compare favorably with those reported in other studies using different types of immobilization devices. © 2013 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
This section shows information related to the publication - computed using the fingerprint of the publication - including related publications, related experts with fingerprints representing significant amounts of overlap between their fingerprint and this publication. The red dots indicate whether those experts or terms appear within the publication, thereby showing potential and actual connections.
Yin Yang; Zichun Zhong; Guodong Rong; Xiaohu Guo; Jing Wang; Timothy Solberg; Weihua MaoProceedings - 4th Pacific-Rim Symposium on Image and Video Technology, PSIVT 2010. 2010:495-500.
John H. Lewis; Ruijiang Li; Xun Jia; W Tyler Watkins; Yifei Lou; William Y Song; Steve B. JiangPhysics in Medicine and Biology. 2011;56(17):5485-5502.
Jeffrey Bradley; Kyounghwa Bae; Noah Choi; Ken Forster; Barry A. Siegel; Jacqueline Brunetti; James Purdy; Sergio Faria; Toni Vu; Wade Thorstad; et al.
A phase II comparative study of gross tumor volume definition with or without PET/CT fusion in dosimetric planning for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Primary analysis of Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0515International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics. 2012;82(1):435-441.
Appears in this Document