[an error occurred while processing this directive]|[an error occurred while processing this directive]
千伏级X线透视成像与锥形束CT确定头颈部摆位误差的比较
李明辉, 张寅, 戴建荣, 张彦新, 高黎
100021 北京,中国医学科学院北京协和医学院肿瘤医院肿瘤研究所放疗科
Comparing the performance of two methods to determine set-up errors for patients with head-and-neck cancer
LI Ming-hui, ZHANG Yin, DAI Jian-rong, ZHANG Yan-xin, GAO Li
Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Hospital (Insititute), Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, Peking Union Medical College, Beijing 100021, China Corresponding author:DAI Jian-rong
Abstract：Objective Both kilovolt (KV) cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and KV radiography can determine set-up errors for patients with head-and-neck cancer. This study is to compare their performance. Methods 16 patients with head and neck cancer were enrolled in this study. There were 160 sets of CBCT and corresponding orthogonal radiography images. Through registration of CBCT images with the planning CT images, and registration of radiography images with the digitally reconstructed radiographs, translational set-up errors were determined along left-right (x), super-inferior (y), and anterior-posterior (z) directions. Pearson correlation analysis was performed to evaluate the correlation of the set up errors determined by the two methods, and Bland-Altman plot analysis was used to assess the coincidence of these two methods. Results The Pearson coefficient of correlation along all three directions was less than 0.01, and R2 was 0.95, 0.84, 0.81 on x, y, z, respectively. That means high correlation for two methods. The Bland-Altman plot analysis showed that the 95% agreement limits of agreement were within preset 2 mm tolerance (x\[1.3 mm,－1.2 mm\],y\[1.6 mm,－1.1 mm\],z\[0. 8 mm,-1.4 mm\]), which indicates an agreement exists for two methods. Conclusions For determination of set-up errors for patients with head and neck cancer, KV radiography is equivalent to CBCT. Considering CBCT delivers higher dose than KV radiography, but provides more soft tissue information. We suggest to use these two methods combinative in clinic.
LI Ming-hui,ZHANG Yin,DAI Jian-rong et al. Comparing the performance of two methods to determine set-up errors for patients with head-and-neck cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology, 2012, 21(4): 374-376.
[1] 戴建荣,胡逸民.图像引导放疗的实现方式.中华放射肿瘤学杂志,2006,15:132-135. [2] Murphy MJ, Balter J, Balter S,et al. The management of imaging dose during image-guided radiotherapy:report of the AAPM task group 75. Med Phys,2006,34:4041-4063. [3] Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT, et al. Cancer risks attributable to low dose of ionizing radiation:assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA,2003,100:13761-13766. [4] 戴建荣．电离辐射与物质的相互作用//胡逸民．肿瘤放射物理学．北京:原子能出版社,1999:15. [5] Astreinidou E, Bel A, Raajmakers CP, et al. Adequat margins for random setup uncertainties in head-and-neck IMRT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2005,61:938-944. [6] Ma JL, Chang Z, Wang ZH, et al. ExacTrac X-ray 6 degree-of-freedom image-guidance for intracranial non-invasive stereotactic radiotherapy:comparison with kilo-voltage cone-beam CT. Radiother Oncol,2009,93:602-608. [7] 陈卉. Bland2Altman 分析在临床测量方法一致性评价中的应用.中国卫生统计,2007,24:308-315. [8] Moseley DJ, White EA, Wiltshire KW, et al. Comparison of Localization Performance with implanted fiducial markers and cone-beam computed tomography for on-line image-guided radiotherapy of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys.2007,67:942-953.
2012, Vol. 21 
