NDLI: Evaluation of daily patient positioning for radiotherapy with a commercial 3D surface-imaging system (Catalyst™)

Content Provider	Springer Nature : BioMed Central
Author	Walter, F. Freislederer, P. Belka, C. Heinz, C. Söhn, M. Roeder, F.
Abstract	Background To report our initial clinical experience with the novel surface imaging system Catalyst™ (C-RAD AB, Sweden) in connection with an Elekta Synergy linear accelerator for daily patient positioning in patients undergoing radiation therapy. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the patient positioning of 154 fractions in 25 patients applied to thoracic, abdominal, and pelvic body regions. Patients were routinely positioned based on skin marks, shifted to the calculated isocenter position and treated after correction via cone beam CT which served as gold standard. Prior to CBCT an additional surface scan by the Catalyst™ system was performed and compared to a reference surface image cropped from the planning CT to obtain shift vectors for an optimal surface match. These shift vectors were subtracted from the vectors obtained by CBCT correction to assess the theoretical setup error that would have occurred if the patients had been positioned using solely the Catalyst™ system. The mean theoretical set up-error and its standard deviation were calculated for all measured fractions and the results were compared to patient positioning based on skin marks only. Results Integration of the surface scan into the clinical workflow did not result in a significant time delay. Regarding the entire group, the mean setup error by using skin marks only was 0.0 ± 2.1 mm in lateral, −0.4 ± 2.4 mm in longitudinal, and 1.1 ± 2.6 mm vertical direction. The mean theoretical setup error that would have occurred using solely the Catalyst™ was −0.1 ± 2.1 mm laterally, −1.8 ± 5.4 mm longitudinally, and 1.4 ± 3.2 mm vertically. No significant difference was found in any direction. For thoracic targets the mean setup error based on the Catalyst™ was 0.6 ± 2.6 mm laterally, −5.0 ± 7.9 mm longitudinally, and 0.5 ± 3.2 mm vertically. For abdominal targets, the mean setup error was 0.3 ± 2.2 mm laterally, 2.6 ± 1.8 mm longitudinally, and 2.1 ± 5.5 mm vertically. For pelvic targets, the setup error was −0.9 ± 1.5 mm laterally, −1.7 ± 2.8 mm longitudinally, and 1.6 ± 2.2 mm vertically. A significant difference between Catalyst™ and skin mark based positioning was only observed in longitudinal direction of pelvic targets. Conclusion Optical surface scanning using Catalyst™ seems potentially useful for daily positioning at least to complement usual imaging modalities in most patients with acceptable accuracy, although a significant improvement compared to skin mark based positioning could not be derived from the evaluated data. However, this effect seemed to be rather caused by the unexpected high accuracy of skin mark based positioning than by inaccuracy using the Catalyst™. Further on, surface registration in longitudinal axis seemed less reliable especially in pelvic localization. Therefore further prospective evaluation based on strictly predefined protocols is needed to determine the optimal scanning approaches and parameters.
Related Links	https://ro-journal.biomedcentral.com/counter/pdf/10.1186/s13014-016-0728-1.pdf
Ending Page	8
Page Count	8
Starting Page	1
File Format	HTM / HTML
DOI	10.1186/s13014-016-0728-1
Journal	Radiation Oncology
Issue Number	1
Volume Number	11
Language	English
Publisher	BioMed Central
Publisher Date	2016-11-24
Access Restriction	Open
Subject Keyword	Cancer Research Oncology Radiotherapy Imaging Radiology Optical surface scanning Catalyst Patient positioning Cone-beam computed tomography
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging Oncology
Journal Impact Factor	3.3/2023
5-Year Journal Impact Factor	3.6/2023

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Evaluation of a 3D surface imaging system for deep inspiration breath-hold patient positioning and intra-fraction monitoring

Dose coverage and breath-hold analysis of breast cancer patients treated with surface-guided radiotherapy

Review of cone beam computed tomography based online adaptive radiotherapy: current trend and future direction

Stereoscopic X-ray imaging, cone beam CT, and couch positioning in stereotactic radiotherapy of intracranial tumors: preliminary results from a cross-modality pilot installation

Application of four-dimensional cone beam computed tomography in lung cancer radiotherapy

A comparison of patient position displacements from body surface laser scanning and cone beam CT bone registrations for radiotherapy of pelvic targets.

Correction: Application of four-dimensional cone beam computed tomography in lung cancer radiotherapy

Shift detection discrepancy between ExacTrac Dynamic system and cone-beam computed tomography.

AlignRT^®, Catalyst™ and RPM™ in locoregional radiotherapy of breast cancer with DIBH. Is IGRT still needed?

Evaluation of daily patient positioning for radiotherapy with a commercial 3D surface-imaging system (Catalyst™)

Similar Documents

Evaluation of a 3D surface imaging system for deep inspiration breath-hold patient positioning and intra-fraction monitoring

Dose coverage and breath-hold analysis of breast cancer patients treated with surface-guided radiotherapy

Review of cone beam computed tomography based online adaptive radiotherapy: current trend and future direction

Stereoscopic X-ray imaging, cone beam CT, and couch positioning in stereotactic radiotherapy of intracranial tumors: preliminary results from a cross-modality pilot installation

Application of four-dimensional cone beam computed tomography in lung cancer radiotherapy

A comparison of patient position displacements from body surface laser scanning and cone beam CT bone registrations for radiotherapy of pelvic targets.

Correction: Application of four-dimensional cone beam computed tomography in lung cancer radiotherapy

Shift detection discrepancy between ExacTrac Dynamic system and cone-beam computed tomography.

AlignRT®, Catalyst™ and RPM™ in locoregional radiotherapy of breast cancer with DIBH. Is IGRT still needed?

Evaluation of daily patient positioning for radiotherapy with a commercial 3D surface-imaging system (Catalyst™)

AlignRT^®, Catalyst™ and RPM™ in locoregional radiotherapy of breast cancer with DIBH. Is IGRT still needed?