Ji Woon Yea

Fabrication of malleable three-dimensional-printed customized bolus using three-dimensional scanner

A three-dimensional (3D)-printed customized bolus (3D bolus) can be used for radiotherapy application to irregular surfaces. However, bolus fabrication based on computed tomography (CT) scans is complicated and also delivers unwanted irradiation. Consequently, we fabricated a bolus using a 3D scanner and evaluated its efficacy. The head of an Alderson Rando phantom was scanned with a 3D scanner. The 3D surface data were exported and reconstructed with Geomagic Design X software. A 3D bolus of 5-mm thickness designed to fit onto the nose was printed with the use of rubber-like printing material, and a radiotherapy plan was developed. We successfully fabricated the customized 3D bolus, and further, a CT simulation indicated an acceptable fit of the 3D bolus to the nose. There was no air gap between the bolus and the phantom surface. The percent depth dose (PDD) curve of the phantom with the 3D bolus showed an enhanced surface dose when compared with that of the phantom without the bolus. The PDD of the 3D bolus was comparable with that of a commercial superflab bolus. The radiotherapy plan considering the 3D bolus showed improved target coverage when compared with that without the bolus. Thus, we successfully fabricated a customized 3D bolus for an irregular surface using a 3D scanner instead of a CT scanner.

The impact of beam angle configuration of intensity- modulated radiotherapy in the hepatocellular carcinoma

Purpose This treatment planning study was undertaken to evaluate the impact of beam angle configuration of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) on the dose of the normal liver in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Materials and Methods The computed tomography datasets of 25 patients treated with IMRT for HCC were selected. Two IMRT plans using five beams were made in each patient; beams with equidistance of 72° (Plan I), and beams with a 30° angle of separation entering the body near the tumor (Plan II). Both plans were generated using the same constraints in each patient. Conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), gamma index, mean dose of the normal liver (Dmean_NL), Dmean_NL difference between the two plans, and percentage normal liver volumes receiving at least 10, 20, and 30 Gy (V10, V20, and V30) were evaluated and compared. Results Dmean_NL, V10, and V20 were significantly better for Plan II. The Dmean_NL was significantly lower for peripheral (p = 0.001) and central tumors (p = 0.034). Dmean_NL differences between the two plans increased in proportion to gross tumor volume to normal liver volume ratios (p = 0.002). CI, HI, and gamma indices were not significantly different for the two plans. Conclusion The IMRT plan based on beams with narrow separations reduced the irradiated dose of the normal liver, which would allow radiation dose escalation for HCC.

Feasibility of a 3D-printed anthropomorphic patient-specific head phantom for patient-specific quality assurance of intensity-modulated radiotherapy

This study evaluated the feasibility of utilizing a 3D-printed anthropomorphic patient-specific head phantom for patient-specific quality assurance (QA) in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Contoured left and right head phantoms were converted from DICOM to STL format. Fused deposition modeling (FDM) was used to construct an anthropomorphic patient-specific head phantom with a 3D printer. An established QA technique and the patient-specific head phantom were used to compare the calculated and measured doses. When the established technique was used to compare the calculated and measured doses, the gamma passing rate for γ ≤ 1 was 97.28%, while the gamma failure rate for γ > 1 was 2.72%. When the 3D-printed patient-specific head phantom was used, the gamma passing rate for γ ≤ 1 was 95.97%, and the gamma failure rate for γ > 1 was 4.03%. The 3D printed patient-specific head phantom was concluded to be highly feasible for patient-specific QA prior to complicated radiotherapy procedures such as IMRT.

Analysis of the Setup Uncertainty and Margin of the Daily ExacTrac 6D Image Guide System for Patients with Brain Tumors

This study evaluated the setup uncertainties for brain sites when using BrainLAB’s ExacTrac X-ray 6D system for daily pretreatment to determine the optimal planning target volume (PTV) margin. Between August 2012 and April 2015, 28 patients with brain tumors were treated by daily image-guided radiotherapy using the BrainLAB ExacTrac 6D image guidance system of the Novalis-Tx linear accelerator. DUONTM (Orfit Industries, Wijnegem, Belgium) masks were used to fix the head. The radiotherapy was fractionated into 27–33 treatments. In total, 844 image verifications were performed for 28 patients and used for the analysis. The setup corrections along with the systematic and random errors were analyzed for six degrees of freedom in the translational (lateral, longitudinal, and vertical) and rotational (pitch, roll, and yaw) dimensions. Optimal PTV margins were calculated based on van Herk et al.’s [margin recipe = 2.5∑ + 0.7σ - 3 mm] and Stroom et al.’s [margin recipe = 2∑ + 0.7σ] formulas. The systematic errors (∑) were 0.72, 1.57, and 0.97 mm in the lateral, longitudinal, and vertical translational dimensions, respectively, and 0.72°, 0.87°, and 0.83° in the pitch, roll, and yaw rotational dimensions, respectively. The random errors (σ) were 0.31, 0.46, and 0.54 mm in the lateral, longitudinal, and vertical rotational dimensions, respectively, and 0.28°, 0.24°, and 0.31° in the pitch, roll, and yaw rotational dimensions, respectively. According to van Herk et al.’s and Stroom et al.’s recipes, the recommended lateral PTV margins were 0.97 and 1.66 mm, respectively; the longitudinal margins were 1.26 and 3.47 mm, respectively; and the vertical margins were 0.21 and 2.31 mm, respectively. Therefore, daily setup verifications using the BrainLAB ExacTrac 6D image guide system are very useful for evaluating the setup uncertainties and determining the setup margin.

Evaluations of the setup discrepancy between BrainLAB 6D ExacTrac and cone-beam computed tomography used with the imaging guidance system Novalis-Tx for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery

The objective of this study was to evaluate the setup discrepancy between BrainLAB 6 degree-of-freedom (6D) ExacTrac and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) used with the imaging guidance system Novalis Tx for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery. We included 107 consecutive patients for whom white stereotactic head frame masks (R408; Clarity Medical Products, Newark, OH) were used to fix the head during intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery, between August 2012 and July 2016. The patients were immobilized in the same state for both the verification image using 6D ExacTrac and online 3D CBCT. In addition, after radiation treatment, registration between the computed tomography simulation images and the CBCT images was performed with offline 6D fusion in an offline review. The root-mean-square of the difference in the translational dimensions between the ExacTrac system and CBCT was <1.01 mm for online matching and <1.10 mm for offline matching. Furthermore, the root-mean-square of the difference in the rotational dimensions between the ExacTrac system and the CBCT were <0.82° for online matching and <0.95° for offline matching. It was concluded that while the discrepancies in residual setup errors between the ExacTrac 6D X-ray and the CBCT were minor, they should not be ignored.

Statistical Determination of the Gating Windows for Respiratory-Gated Radiotherapy Using a Visible Guiding System

Respiratory-gated radiation therapy (RGRT) is used to minimize the radiation dose to normal tissue in lung-cancer patients. Although determining the gating window in the respiratory phase of patients is important in RGRT, it is not easy. Our aim was to determine the optimal gating window when using a visible guiding system for RGRT. Between April and October 2014, the breathing signals of 23 lung-cancer patients were recorded with a real-time position management (RPM) respiratory gating system (Varian, USA). We performed statistical analysis with breathing signals to find the optimal gating window for guided breathing in RGRT. When we compared breathing signals before and after the breathing training, 19 of the 23 patients showed statistically significant differences (p < 0.05). The standard deviation of the respiration signals after breathing training was lowest for phases of 30%–70%. The results showed that the optimal gating window in RGRT is 40% (30%–70%) with respect to repeatability for breathing after respiration training with the visible guiding system. RGRT was performed with the RPM system to confirm the usefulness of the visible guiding system. The RPM system and our visible guiding system improve the respiratory regularity, which in turn should improve the accuracy and efficiency of RGRT.

Comparison of IMRT dose calculations with a PBC and AAA algorithms in the lung cancer

the pencil beam convolution (PBC) algorithms in radiation treatment planning system are widely used to calcu- late the radiation dose. A new photon dose calculation algo- rithm as known as anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) released in the Varian medical system.