Downloads: 168

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
j.radonc.2014.02.018.pdf2.74 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Title: Intrafractional tracking accuracy in infrared marker-based hybrid dynamic tumour-tracking irradiation with a gimballed linac.
Authors: Mukumoto, Nobutaka  kyouindb  KAKEN_id
Nakamura, Mitsuhiro  kyouindb  KAKEN_id
Yamada, Masahiro
Takahashi, Kunio
Tanabe, Hiroaki
Yano, Shinsuke
Miyabe, Yuki  kyouindb  KAKEN_id
Ueki, Nami
Kaneko, Shuji
Matsuo, Yukinori  kyouindb  KAKEN_id  orcid https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4372-8259 (unconfirmed)
Mizowaki, Takashi  kyouindb  KAKEN_id  orcid https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8135-8746 (unconfirmed)
Sawada, Akira
Kokubo, Masaki
Hiraoka, Masahiro
Author's alias: 中村, 光宏
Keywords: Four-dimensional image-guided radiotherapy
Dynamic tumour-tracking irradiation
Respiratory motion
Vero4DRT
Intra-fractional tracking accuracy
Issue Date: May-2014
Publisher: Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
Journal title: Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology
Volume: 111
Issue: 2
Start page: 301
End page: 305
Abstract: [Purpose]To verify the intrafractional tracking accuracy in infrared (IR) marker-based hybrid dynamic tumour tracking irradiation ("IR Tracking") with the Vero4DRT. [Materials and methods]The gimballed X-ray head tracks a moving target by predicting its future position from displacements of IR markers in real-time. Ten lung cancer patients who underwent IR Tracking were enrolled. The 95th percentiles of intrafractional mechanical (iE^[95]_M), prediction (iE^[95]_P), and overall targeting errors (iE^[95]_T ) were calculated from orthogonal fluoroscopy images acquired during tracking irradiation and from the synchronously acquired log files. [Results]Averaged intrafractional errors were (left–right, cranio-caudal [CC], anterior–posterior [AP]) = (0.1 mm, 0.4 mm, 0.1 mm) for iE^[95]_M, (1.2 mm, 2.7 mm, 2.1 mm) for iE^[95]_P , and (1.3 mm, 2.4 mm, 1.4 mm) for iE^[95]_T. By correcting systematic prediction errors in the previous field, the iE^[95]_P was reduced significantly, by an average of 0.4 mm in the CC (p < 0.05) and by 0.3 mm in the AP (p < 0.01) directions. [Conclusions]Prediction errors were the primary cause of overall targeting errors, whereas mechanical errors were negligible. Furthermore, improvement of the prediction accuracy could be achieved by correcting systematic prediction errors in the previous field.
Rights: © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
この論文は出版社版でありません。引用の際には出版社版をご確認ご利用ください。This is not the published version. Please cite only the published version.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2433/188903
DOI(Published Version): 10.1016/j.radonc.2014.02.018
PubMed ID: 24746563
Appears in Collections:Journal Articles

Show full item record

Export to RefWorks


Export Format: 


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.