| Jiayu Du,Jie Tang,Qian Zhang,Xiaojie Ma. Cone beam computed tomography-guided differences among registration methods for lung cancer and the effects of tumor position, treatment model, and tumor size on positioning errors. Oncol Transl Med, 2021, 7: 203-208. |
| Cone beam computed tomography-guided differences among registration methods for lung cancer and the effects of tumor position, treatment model, and tumor size on positioning errors |
| Received:June 05, 2021 Revised:October 29, 2021 |
| View Full Text View/Add Comment Download reader |
| KeyWord:lung cancer; IMRT; positioning error; registration method; CBCT; different tumor locations; different treatment modes; tumor size |
| Author Name | Affiliation | E-mail | | Jiayu Du | 北川医学院附属医院 | 1256357656@qq.com | | Jie Tang | Department of Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College | | | Qian Zhang | Department of Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College | | | Xiaojie Ma | Department of Oncology, Affiliated Hospital of North Sichuan Medical College | 992437730@qq.com |
|
| Hits: 3286 |
| Download times: 3723 |
| Abstract: |
| Objective To explore the differences in three different registration methods of cone beam computed
tomography (CBCT)-guided down-regulated intense radiation therapy for lung cancer as well as the effects
of tumor location, treatment mode, and tumor size on registration.
Methods This retrospective analysis included 80 lung cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy in our
hospital from November 2017 to October 2019 and compared automatic bone registration, automatic
grayscale (t + r) registration, and automatic grayscale (t) positioning error on the X-, Y-, and Z-axes under
three types of registration methods. The patients were also grouped according to tumor position, treatment
mode, and tumor size to compare positioning errors.
Results On the X-, Y-, and Z-axes, automatic grayscale (t + r) and automatic grayscale (t) registration
showed a better trend. Analysis of the different treatment modes showed differences in the three registration
methods; however, these were not statistically significant. Analysis according to tumor sizes showed
significant differences between the three registration methods (P < 0.05). Analysis according to tumor
positions showed differences in the X- and Y-axes that were not significant (P > 0.05), while the autopsy
registration in the Z-axis showed the largest difference in the mediastinal and hilar lymph nodes (P < 0.05).
Conclusion The treatment mode was not the main factor affecting registration error in lung cancer. Three
registration methods are available for tumors in the upper and lower lungs measuring < 3 cm; among
these, automatic gray registration is recommended, while any gray registration method is recommended
for tumors located in the mediastinal hilar site measuring < 3 cm and in the upper and lower lungs ≥ 3 cm. |
| Close |
|
|
|