• K M Langen, J Pouliot, C Anezinos, M Aubin, A R Gottschalk, I-C Hsu, D Lowther, Y-M Liu, K Shinohara, L J Verhey, V Weinberg, and M Roach.
• Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA. Langen@radonc17.ucsf.edu
• Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2003 Nov 1; 57 (3): 635-44.

AbstractTo evaluate the use of the ultrasound-based BAT system for daily prostate alignment. Prostate alignments using the BAT system were compared with alignments using radiographic images of implanted radiopaque markers. The latter alignments were used as a reference. The difference between the BAT and marker alignments represents the displacements that would remain if the alignments were done using ultrasonography. The inter-user variability of the contour alignment process was assessed. On the basis of the marker alignments, the initial displacement of the prostate in the AP, superoinferior, and lateral direction was -0.9 +/- 3.9, 0.1 +/- 3.9, and 0.2 +/- 3.4 mm respectively. The directed differences between the BAT and marker alignments in the respective directions were 0.2 +/- 3.7, 2.7 +/- 3.9, and 1.6 +/- 3.1 mm. The occurrence of displacements >/=5 mm was reduced by a factor of two in the AP direction after the BAT system was used. Among eight users, the average range of couch shifts due to contour alignment variability was 7, 7, and 5 mm in the antero-posterior (AP), superoinferior, and lateral direction, respectively. In our study, the BAT alignments were systematically different from the marker alignments in the superoinferior, and lateral directions. The remaining random variability of the prostate position after the ultrasound-based alignment was similar to the initial variability. However, the occurrence of displacements >/=5 mm was reduced in the AP direction. The inter-user variation of the contour alignment process was significant.

17 keywords...

hide…