Comparison of the positional stability of two different methods of marking surface landmarks in radiotherapy patients with abdominal and pelvic fixation
10.3760/cma.j.cn121382-20230509-00410
- VernacularTitle:两种体表标记线勾画方式在腹盆部患者体位固定中的稳定性比较
- Author:
Haitao LIN
1
;
Hong ZHU
;
Fubo LIU
;
Xinlei ZHANG
;
Hangbiao SUN
;
Xuwei HE
;
Feng LI
;
Qunchao HU
Author Information
1. 上海交通大学医学院附属同仁医院放疗科，上海 200050
- Keywords:
Radiotherapy;
Abdominal tumors;
Positional fixation;
Setup error
- From:
International Journal of Biomedical Engineering
2023;46(4):342-347
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the effects of two methods of marking surface landmarks on the patient’s positional stability when using a multifunctional body board in combination with thermoplastics to fix the abdominal and pelvic areas for radiotherapy patients.Methods:50 subjects who underwent positional fixation using a multifunctional body board in combination with thermoplastics from August 2022 to January 2023. The subjects were divided into two groups, A and B, with 25 cases each, according to the different methods of body surface marking. In group A, landmarks were marked on the body surface on the top edge of the thermoplastics. In group B, three sets of surface landmarks were marked on the patient’s body according to the laser line on the projection of the patient’s body surface when the thermoplastics were completed. Manual registration is performed using L3 to L5 as the main registration targets. The pre-treatment CBCT image is used to analyze the first-time positioning pass rate, setup errors in the x-, y-, and z-axis directions, and the distribution of positive and negative setup errors in both groups of patients. Results:The pass rates of the first-time positioning of patients in Groups A and B were 76.9% and 86.1%, respectively, which met the clinical requirements. Group B had a better first-time positioning pass rate than group A, and the difference between the two groups was statistically significant ( P < 0.05). The pendulum errors of group B were smaller than those of group A in both the x-axis and y-axis (all P < 0.05), and the difference between the two groups in terms of the pendulum errors in the z-axis direction was not statistically significant (all P > 0.05). The difference in the frequency distribution of the pendulum error in the positive and negative directions of the x- and z-axis between the two groups was not statistically significant (all P > 0.05). The difference in the frequency of distribution of the pendulum error in the positive and negative directions of the y-axis between the two groups was statistically significant ( P < 0.05). Conclusions:The proposed two methods of surface landmark marking are generally in line with the positioning requirements for conventional fractionation radiotherapy for abdominal and pelvic patients. Using a laser line on the projection of the patient’s body surface for three sets of surface landmark markings produces smaller setup errors and is better than using the top edge of the thermoplastics for surface landmark markings, improving the positional stability of abdominal and pelvic patients.
