Local interfractional setup reproducibility for 2 individual head and neck supports in head and neck cancer patients.

Abstract

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Two groups of 15 patients were evaluated: the first group of patients was positioned using a vacuum cushion as an individual head support and the second group with a modified Posifix headrest (MPH). A total of 316 cone beam computed tomography (CBCTs; ~ 10 scans per patient) were evaluated using a multiple region of interest registration protocol. Local setup errors were measured using chamfer matching on the CBCT scan to the planning CT scan for 9 bony structures (cervical vertebrae 1, 3, 5, and 7 [C7], lower jaw, hyoid bone, larynx, skull, and jugular notch). In this study, we compared the local residual misalignments of the bony structures and in particular those of the jugular notch and C7 as surrogates of the shoulders and thorax region. The workload was qualitatively evaluated on the basis of open interviews.

RESULTS

The significant differences in group mean, systematic error, and random error of the local residual misalignments between the 2 groups for jugular notch and C7 were equal or smaller than 0.5 mm and 0.1 degrees, and for the other 7 bony structures were equal to or smaller than 0.6 mm and 1.2 degrees (larynx). There were no large differences in workload.

CONCLUSIONS

No clinically relevant differences were found between a modified Posifix headrest and an individual vacuum cushion for H&N cancer patients in local posture change at the level of the clavicle and upper thorax.

PURPOSE

In radiation therapy, head and neck (H&N) supports and thermoplastic masks are used to reproduce the setup of patients for H&N treatment. Individualized supports that include the shoulders may improve the immobilization of the upper thorax region. The purpose of this study was to compare the local misalignment of the supraclavicular region using a vacuum cushion H&N support to a more simple in-house modified, clinically standard H&N support.

More about this publication

Practical radiation oncology
  • Volume 4
  • Issue nr. 6
  • Pages 448-54
  • Publication date 20-11-2014

This site uses cookies

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website.