Comparison of two immobilization techniques using portal film and digitally reconstructed radiographs for pediatric patients with brain tumors.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 11072183.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
To compare the accuracy of two immobilization techniques for pediatric brain tumor patients. We analyzed data from 128 treatments involving 22 patients. Patients were immobilized with either a relocatable head frame (12 patients) or a vacuum bag (10 patients). Orthogonal portal films were used as verification images. Errors in patient positioning were measured by comparing verification images with digitally reconstructed radiographs generated by a three-dimensional treatment-planning system. With the head frame, systematic errors ranged from 1.4 mm to 2.1 mm; random errors, from 1.7 mm to 2.1 mm. With the vacuum bag, systematic errors ranged from 2.1 mm to 2.5 mm; random errors, from 2.0 mm to 2.6 mm. For the head frame, the mean length of the radial displacement was 4.4 mm; 90% of the total three-dimensional deviation was less than 6.8 mm. The corresponding values for the vacuum bag were 5.0 and 6.6 mm, respectively. The head frame and vacuum bag techniques limit the random and systematic errors in each of the three directions to within +/- 5 mm. We have used these results to determine the margin used to create the planning target volume for conformal radiation therapy.
Medical subject headings
- Brain Neoplasms
- Image Processing, Computer-Assisted
- Restraint, Physical