Frontiers in Oncology (Oct 2022)

Setup error assessment based on “Sphere-Mask” Optical Positioning System: Results from a multicenter study

  • Yan Zhang,
  • Han Zhou,
  • Kaiyue Chu,
  • Chuanfeng Wu,
  • Yun Ge,
  • Guoping Shan,
  • Guoping Shan,
  • Jundong Zhou,
  • Jing Cai,
  • Jianhua Jin,
  • Weiyu Sun,
  • Ying Chen,
  • Xiaolin Huang

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2022.918296
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 12

Abstract

Read online

BackgroundThe setup accuracy plays an extremely important role in the local control of tumors. The purpose of this study is to verify the feasibility of "Sphere-Mask" Optical Positioning System (S-M_OPS) for fast and accurate setup.MethodsFrom 2016 to 2021, we used S-M_OPS to supervise 15441 fractions in 1981patients (with the cancer in intracalvarium, nasopharynx, esophagus, lung, liver, abdomen or cervix) undergoing intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), and recorded the data such as registration time and mask deformation. Then, we used S-M_OPS, laser line and cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for co-setup in 277 fractions, and recorded laser line-guided setup errors and S-M_OPS-guided setup errors with CBCT-guided setup result as the standard.ResultsS-M_OPS supervision results: The average time for laser line-guided setup was 31.75s. 12.8% of the reference points had an average deviation of more than 2 mm and 5.2% of the reference points had an average deviation of more than 3 mm. Co-setup results: The average time for S-M_OPS-guided setup was 7.47s, and average time for CBCT-guided setup was 228.84s (including time for CBCT scan and manual verification). In the LAT (left/right), VRT (superior/inferior) and LNG (anterior/posterior) directions, laser line-guided setup errors (mean±SD) were -0.21±3.13mm, 1.02±2.76mm and 2.22±4.26mm respectively; the 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) of laser line-guided setup errors were -6.35 to 5.93mm, -4.39 to 6.43mm and -6.14 to 10.58mm respectively; S-M_OPS-guided setup errors were 0.12±1.91mm, 1.02±1.81mm and -0.10±2.25mm respectively; the 95% CIs of S-M_OPS-guided setup errors were -3.86 to 3.62mm, -2.53 to 4.57mm and -4.51 to 4.31mm respectively.ConclusionS-M_OPS can greatly improve setup accuracy and stability compared with laser line-guided setup. Furthermore, S-M_OPS can provide comparable setup accuracy to CBCT in less setup time.

Keywords