Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  160 / 1082 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 160 / 1082 Next Page
Page Background

S147

ESTRO 36 2017

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

the transponder motion and treatment delivery were used

to calculate the motion-induced geometrical errors during

beam-on in the actual gated treatments and in simulated

non-gated standard treatments with CBCT-guided setup to

the mean transponder centroid position before each

fraction. The observed motion was used to reconstruct the

actually delivered CTV dose distribution with gating and

the would-be dose distribution without gating.

Results

Fig. 1 shows the internal tumor motion during a single

fraction. Due to drift and respiratory motion the mean (+/-

SD) geometric error during non-gated treatment at this

fraction (Fig1A) would have been 1.3mm (1.7) LR, 5.0mm

(7.7) CC, and -2.0mm (1.8) AP. The gated treatment,

including 5 couch shifts to counteract drift (Fig1B),

reduced the errors to 0.7mm (0.7) LR, 0.4mm (1.9) CC,

and -0.1mm (0.9) AP. Fig. 1C shows the CC geometrical

errors for all patients. The mean (range) number of couch

corrections for drifts during each gated fraction was 2.8

(0-7). The mean duty cycle during gated treatment was

60.8% (31.7-72.7%). As shown in Fig 2A, gating markedly

reduced the population based PTV margin needed for

intrafraction

motion.

Motion-including

dose-

reconstruction provided the CTV-DVHs of all fractions of

planned, actual gated delivered, and simulated non-gated

delivered doses. Mean CTV-DVHs are shown in Fig 2B. Note

the large DVH variation for non-gated treatments. The

mean (range) reduction in CTV D

95

relative to the planned

dose was 0.9 percent points (0.1-2.3) with gating and 6.8

percent points (0.9-29.6) without gating.

Conclusion

Gating based on internal motion monitoring markedly

reduced geometric and dosimetric errors in liver SBRT

compared to non-gated standard treatment. Results of the

full trial (15 patients) are expected for presentation at

ESTRO.

PV-0284 3D Performance Analysis of Cyberknife

Synchrony® Respiratory Tracking System

M.C. Sahin

1

, P. Hurmuz

1

, M. Yeginer

1

, G. Yazici

1

, G.

Ozyigit

1

1

Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Radiation

Oncology, Ankara, Turkey

Purpose or Objective

Tumor movement is a challenging issue for the precise

delivery of radiation for thoracic tumors. The Synchrony

respiratory motion tracking system (RMTS) of Cyberknife®

robotic radiosurgery unit synchronizes radiation beam

delivery with the respiration induced tumor motion. This

study aims to investigate the performance of Synchrony

RMTS for different movement widths using polymer gel

dosimetry. To the best of our knowledge this is the first

study to make the three dimensional performance analysis

of Synchrony RMTS.

Material and Methods

The MultiPlan® treatment planning system (TPS) of

Cyberknife® was used to deliver 4 Gy to a tumor of 1X1X1

cm

3

. BrainLab Gating lung phantom was used to simulate

lung movements with three different amplitudes (1 cm, 2

cm and 3 cm). Three fiducials were inserted to the

phantom for tracking. Radiochromic film and polymer gel

dosimetry were used and measurements were compared

with the dose distributions acquired from the TPS. The

dose information of irradiated gel were read out using 1.5

T magnetic resonance imaging. The gamma index values

were analysed using the Ashland FilmQA Pro 3.0 software

for film dosimeters and Polygevero software for gel

dosimeters using the 3mm/3% criteria. PolyGevero gamma

index value of ≤1 is accepted as a passing criteria

according to the literature.

Results

The mean 3 mm/3% gamma index values of film dosimetry

were 92.6±1.94%, 91.0±4.00%, 90.3±2.04% for tumor

motions of 1 cm, 2 cm and 3 cm, respectively

(p<0.001). For polymer gel dosimetry, the mean gamma

index values calculated over almost three million points

were 0.56±0.10, 0.60±0.24 and 0.65±0.30 for tumor

motions of 1 cm, 2 cm and 3 cm, respectively (p<0.001).

Although the difference was statistically significant for 3

different amplitudes, the performance of the system was

within the acceptance limits