A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Quality of patient positioning during cerebral tomotherapy irradiation using different mask systems. | LitMetric

Quality of patient positioning during cerebral tomotherapy irradiation using different mask systems.

Strahlenther Onkol

Radiologische Klinik, FE Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinik Bonn, Sigmund-Freud-Str. 25, 53105, Bonn, Germany,

Published: April 2014

Background And Purpose: Patient immobilization during brain tumor radiotherapy is achieved by employing different mask systems. Two innovative mask systems were developed to minimize the problems of claustrophobic patients. Our aim was to evaluate whether the quality of patient immobilization using the new mask systems was equivalent to the standard mask system currently in use.

Material And Methods: Thirty-three patients with cerebral target volumes were irradiated using the Hi-Art II tomotherapy system between 2010 and 2012. Each group of 11 patients was fitted with one of the two new mask systems (Crystal® or Open Face® mask, Orfit) or the standard three-point mask (Raycast®-HP, Orfit) and a total of 557 radiotherapy fractions were evaluated. After positioning was checked by MV-CT, the necessary table adjustments were noted. Data were analyzed by comparing the groups, and safety margins were calculated for nonimage-guided irradiation.

Results: The mean values of the table adjustments were: (a) lateral (mm): - 0.22 (mask 1, standard deviation (σ): 2.15); 1.1 (mask 2, σ: 2.4); - 0.64 (mask 3, σ: 2.9); (b) longitudinal (mm): - 1 (mask 1, σ: 2.57); - 0.5 (mask 2, σ: 4.7); - 1.22 (mask 3, σ: 2.52); (c) vertical (mm): 0.62 (mask 1, σ: 0.63); 1.2 (mask 2, σ: 1.0); 0.57 (mask 3, σ: 0.28); (d) roll: 0.35° (mask 1, σ: 0.75); 0° (mask 2, σ: 0.8); 0.02° (mask 3, σ: 1.12). The outcomes suggest necessary safety margins of 5.49-7.38 mm (lateral), 5.4-6.56 mm (longitudinal), 0.82-3.9 mm (vertical), and 1.93-4.5° (roll). There were no significant differences between the groups.

Conclusions: The new mask systems improve patient comfort while providing consistent patient positioning.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00066-013-0496-xDOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

mask systems
24
mask
21
quality patient
8
patient positioning
8
patient immobilization
8
table adjustments
8
safety margins
8
systems
6
positioning cerebral
4
cerebral tomotherapy
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!