Abstract Objective To analyze the discrepancies between position adjustments obtained with the stereoscopic 2DKV XGS-10 system and the Varian OBI system for head-and-neck region IMRT treatments, and to compare for image acquisition and registration time. Methods CBCT images were obtained with OBI system and 2DKV images were acquired by XGS-10 system for 30 head-and-neck patients prior to Varian-21EX IMRT treatment. The images were registered with planning image for localization, and position adjustments were given in LR, SI and AP directions, then the discrepancies between them were analyzed.0n the comparison of the two different systems, the Pearson coefficient was used to analyzed the correlation and 95%CI analysis to discern the consistence. Results Analysis of images acquired for the 30 patients yielded the following results:position adjustments with XGS-10 system were (－1.03±2.15) mm,(0.86±2.59) mm,(0.42±1.66) mm in LR, SI and AP directions, whereas (0.00±1.68) mm,(1.53±2.12) mm,(0.10±1.54) mm with CBCT in LR, SI and AP directions. The discrepancies were (－1.03±1.24) mm,(－0.68±1.78) mm and (0.32±1.61) mm in LR, SI and AP directions. The correlation coefficients between them were 0.817, 0.731 and 0.495 in LR, SI and AP directions.95%CI were (－1.47—－0.59),(－1.32—0.04),(－0.26—0.90) mm. The average image acquisition and registration time were 10 s and<15 s in XGS-10 system, with 3 min and 8 min in OBI system. Conclusions Both of XGS-10 system and OBI system could be used to improve patient position accuracy,but XGS-10 system could cut down the total time.
Zhang Sujie,Chen Xiaopin. Analysis of the setup errors of a stereoscopic two-dimensional kilo-voltage XGS-10 system for head-and-neck region intensity-modulated radiotherapy[J]. Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology, 2014, 23(3): 256-258.
Zhang Sujie,Chen Xiaopin. Analysis of the setup errors of a stereoscopic two-dimensional kilo-voltage XGS-10 system for head-and-neck region intensity-modulated radiotherapy[J]. Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology, 2014, 23(3): 256-258.
[1] Hurkmans CW, Remeijer P, Lebesque JV, et al. Set-up verification using portal images, review of current clinical practice[J]. Radiother Oncol,2001,58:105-120. [2] Thephamongkhol K, Laebua K, Dankulchai P, et al. A Pilot comparison study of setup verification between two-dimensional kilo-voltage (2DKV) match and kilo-voltage cone-beam computed tomography (KV-CBCT) match for nasopharyngeal cancer patients[J]. Siriraj Med,2011,63:47-51. [3] Ottosson W, Baker M, Hedman M, et al. Evaluation of setup accuracy for NSCLC patients;studying the impact of different types of cone-beam CT matches based on whole thorax, columna vertebralis, and GTV[J]. Acta Oncol,2010,49:1184-1191. [4] Chang Z, Wang Z, Ma J, et al. Six degree-of-freedom image guidance for frameless intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery with kilo-voltage cone-beam CT[J]. J Nucl Med Radiat Ther, 2010,1:101.doi:10.4172/2155-9619.1000101[2013-05-10].http://www.omicsonline.org/2155-9619/2155-9619-1-101.php. [5] 刘新帆.电离辐射的诱发恶性肿瘤效应[A]//殷蔚伯,余子豪,徐国镇,等.肿瘤放射治疗学[M].4版.北京:中国协和医科大学出版社,2008:22-31. [6] Hayashi N, Takagi H, Hashinokuchi S, et al. Comparison of patient localization accuracy between stereotactic x-ray based setup and cone beam CT based setup on intensity modulated radiation therapy[J]. Siriraj Med J,2011,63:47-51. [7] Song W, Kamath S, Ozawa S, et al. A dose comparison study between XVI and OBI CBCT systems[J]. Med Phys,2008,35:480-486. [8] Wen N, Guan H, Hammoud R, et al. Dose delivered from Varian′s CBCT to patients receiving IMRT for prostate cancer[J]. Phys Med Biol,2007[C],52:2267-2276. [9] Kim S, Yoo S, Yoshizumi T, et al. Monte Carlo benchmark for radiation dose assessment in Varian on-board imager. AAPM 49th Annual Meeting, Minneapolis, USA,2007[C]. Washington:AAPM, 2007.
2014, Vol. 23 
