Abstract：Objective The purpose of the study was to use the CBCT to evaluate the intrafraction error and its effect on the target volume and organs at risk. Methods Twenty-three patients with thoracic esophageal cancer were enrolled into the study. CBCT scans were performed before and at the end of the irradiation to acquire the intrafraction error. Treatment PLAN2 and PLAN3 were simulated according to the intrafraction error. The primary treatment plan was PLAN1. The dosimetry distribution of target volume and organs at risk of the PLAN2 and PLAN3 were analyzed, and then were compared with PLAN1. The datas was analysed by one-factor ANOVA and matched t-test. Results The median intrafraction error (mm) of the upper, the middle and the lower esophageal carcinoma in x, y, z directions were (1.2±1.5) mm,(1.0±1.0) mm,(1.0±1.0) mm (P=0.138),(1.2±1.0) mm,(1.1±1.0) mm,(1.2±1.0) mm (P=0.656) and (1.3±0.1.1) mm,(1.2±1.0) mm,(0.8±0.7) mm (P=0.003), respectively. The frequency of the intrafraction error within 3 mm in x, y, z directions were 95.2%, 94.5%, 93.9%, respectively. Compared with PLAN1, the volume of the GTV exposed to 100% prescription dose of the PLAN3 decreased by 5.55%. There were 3 patients whose prescription dose of the PTV exposed to 95% volume descend more than 5% in PLAN3. The volume of the lung exposed to 30 Gy was (15.24±2.24)% in PLAN3,which was lower than (15.67±2.28)% in PLAN1(P=0.033). There were 4 cases in PLAN2 and 19 cases in PLAN3 whose spinal cord received more than 4500 cGy, the maximum dose were 4517.2 cGy and 5045.2 cGy in PLAN2 and in PLAN3, respectively. Conclusions The dose distribution of the target volume and organs at risk were influenced by intrafraction error in part. Spinal cord is relatively sensitive to the intrafraction error owing to its tandem belongings. Intrafraction error can result in the over irradiation to the spinal cord for some patients.
Shang kai,Wang Jun,Chi Zifeng et al. Analysis of the intrafraction error in image-guided radiotherapy with thoracic esophageal carcinoma[J]. Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology, 2014, 23(4): 344-347.
[1] Bijhold J, van Herk M, Vijlbrief R, et al. Fast evaluation of patient set-up during radiotherapy by aligning features in portal and simulator images[J]. Phys Med Biol,1991,36:1665-1679. [2] Van HM.Errors and margins in radiotherapy[J].Semin Radiat Oncol,2004,14:52-64. [3] Lei Y, Wu Q. A hybrid strategy of offline adaptive planning and online image guidance for prostate cancer radiotherapy[J]. Phys Med Biol,2010,55:2221-2234. [4] Han C, Schiffner DC, Schultheiss TE, et al. Residual setup errors and dose variations with less-than-daily image guided patient setup in external beam radiotherapy for esophageal cancer[J]. Radiother Oncol,2012,102:309-314. [5] Hawkins MA, Frcr M, Brooks C, et al. Cone beam computed tomography-derived adaptive radiotherapy for radical treatment of esophageal cancer[J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2010,77:378-383. [6] Hansen EK, Buccr MK, Quivey JM, et al. Repeat CT imaging and replanning during the course of IMRT for head-and-neck cancer[J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2006,64:355-362. [7] Guckenberger M, Richter A, Wilbert J, et al. Adaptive radiotherapy for locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer does not under dose the microscopic disease and has the potential to increase tumor control[J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2011,81:275-282.
2014, Vol. 23 
