4.5 Article

Evaluation of the voluntary deep inspiration breath-hold reproducibility in left-sided breast radiotherapy

Journal

JOURNAL OF X-RAY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Volume 30, Issue 6, Pages 1057-1066

Publisher

IOS PRESS
DOI: 10.3233/XST-221228

Keywords

Reproducibility; breath-hold level; real-time position management (RPM); deep inspiration; interfraction

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluates the reproducibility and variability of breath-hold level (BHL) in left breast cancer patients using v-DIBH technique. The results show good reproducibility of BHL in different treatment fractions, but poor variability between planning and measured fractions.
PURPOSE: Voluntary deep inspiration breath hold (v-DIBH) reduces cardiac dose during left-sided breast irradiation. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the reproducibility and variability of breath-hold level (BHL) using breath-hold curves and lateral kV setup images together. MATERIAL/METHOD: A retrospective analysis of 30 left breast cancer patients treated using the v-DIBH technique in our department is performed. The BHL difference is measured from breath hold curves and lateral (LAT) kilo-Voltage (kV) setup images. The planning CT image and the selected treatment fraction data are collected. If the changes in BHL relate to the displacement of various bones in the kV setup, images are assessed. Furthermore, the maximum heart distance inside the treatment field is compared from LAT MV portal images. RESULTS: The median and mean values of the BHL are nearly identical in different fractions (good reproducibility). However, the mean BHL values between planning and all measured fractions are statistically different; 16.3 vs. 20.8 mm for the planning and measured fractions (p < 0.001), which indicates that the variability of BHL is significantly different. CONCLUSION: While reproducibility testing shows good agreement for inter-fractional breath-hold level, the variability between planning and fractions is relatively poor.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available