skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: A Comparison Between Electronic Portal Imaging Device and Cone Beam CT in Radiotherapy Verification of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma

Journal Article · · Medical Dosimetry
 [1]; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. Department of Health Technology and Informatics, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Kowloon (Hong Kong)

The demand of greater accuracy in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) has driven the development of more advanced verification systems. The purpose of this study is to investigate the differences in verification accuracy in terms of the position error detected between cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and electronic portal imaging device (EPID) in the IMRT of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Two groups of NPC patients (n = 22 and n = 28) verified by CBCT (G1-CB), EPID (G1-EP), and EPID (G2-EP) only, respectively, were recruited. The positional errors between the G1-CB group and the G2-EP group were compared. In addition, the magnitudes of the position errors of EPID taken in the same session of the CBCT, but after necessary corrections (G1-EP), were analyzed. In the CBCT group, 455 CBCT images (G1-CB) and 206 EPID images (G1-EP) were collected, whereas 319 EPID images (G2-EP) for the EPID group, were recorded. The median position errors detected in CBCT were between 0.80 and 0.90 mm in the antero-posterior (A-P), left-right (L-R), and supero-inferior (S-I) directions, whereas those of the EPID were all 0.50 mm. The magnitude of position deviation detected by the CBCT was higher than that of the EPID and their differences were extremely significant (p < 0.001). The frequencies in the G2-EP group with position errors greater than the tolerance (2 mm) were 32, 42, and 27 in the A-P, L-R, and S-I directions, respectively, which accounted for 16.5%, 21.6%, and 13.9% of the total number of EPID. There was difference in verification capability between the CBCT and EPID when applied to IMRT of NPC patients. Because an average of 1 of 6 verifications in EPID was inferior to that of the CBCT, verification by CBCT is recommended.

OSTI ID:
21486888
Journal Information:
Medical Dosimetry, Vol. 36, Issue 1; Other Information: DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2010.01.005; PII: S0958-3947(10)00016-6; Copyright (c) 2011 Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam, The Netherlands, All rights reserved.; ISSN 0958-3947
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English