Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of setup uncertainties for single-fraction SRS by comparing two different mask-creation methods

  • Published:
Journal of the Korean Physical Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the setup uncertainties for single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SF-SRS) based on clinical data with two different mask-creation methods using pretreatment con-beam computed tomography imaging guidance. Dedicated frameless fixation Brain- LAB masks for 23 patients were created as a routine mask (R-mask) making method, as explained in the BrainLAB’s user manual. Alternative masks (A-masks), which were created by modifying the cover range of the R-masks for the patient’s head, were used for 23 patients. The systematic errors including these for each mask and stereotactic target localizer were analyzed, and the errors were calculated as the means ± standard deviations (SD) from the left-right (LR), superior-inferior (SI), anterior-posterior (AP), and yaw setup corrections. In addition, the frequencies of the threedimensional (3D) vector length were analyzed. The values of the mean setup corrections for the R-mask in all directions were < 0.7 mm and < 0.1°, whereas the magnitudes of the SDs were relatively large compared to the mean values. In contrast, the means and SDs of the A-mask were smaller than those for the R-mask with the exception of the SD in the AP direction. The means and SDs in the yaw rotational direction for the R-mask and the A-mask system were comparable. 3D vector shifts of larger magnitude occurred more frequently for the R-mask than the A-mask. The setup uncertainties for each mask with the stereotactic localizing system had an asymmetric offset towards the positive AP direction. The A-mask-creation method, which is capable of covering the top of the patient’s head, is superior to that for the R-mask, so the use of the A-mask is encouraged for SF-SRS to reduce the setup uncertainties. Moreover, careful mask-making is required to prevent possible setup uncertainties.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Q. Zhang, M. Chan, Y. Song and C. Burman, Int. J. Med. Phys. Clin. Eng. Radiat. Oncol. 1, 15 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. C. C. Ling, Y. C. Lo and D. A. Larson, Semin. Radiat. Oncol. 5, 192 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Y. C. Lo, C. C. Ling and D. A. Larson, Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 34, 1113 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. M. C. Schell, F. J. Bova, D. A. Larson and D. D. Leavitt, AAPM Report No. 54, 1995.

  5. J. Chang, K. M. Yenice, A. Narayana and P. H. Gutin, Med. Phys. 34, 2077 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. L. X. Hong, C. C. Chen, M. Garg, R. Yaparpalvi and D. Mah, Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 73, 556 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. N. Ramakrishna, F. Rosca, S. Friesen, E. Tezcanli, P. Zygmanszki and F. Hacker, Radiother. Oncol. 95, 109 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. T. Gevaert et al., Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 82, 1627 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. W. F. Verbakel, F. J. Lagerwaard, A. J. Verduin, S. Heukelom, B. J. Slotman and J. P. Cuijpers, Radiother. Oncol. 97, 390 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. G. Minniti et al., Radiat. Oncol. 5, 1 (2010).

  11. G. Minniti, C. Scaringi, E. Clarke, M. Valeriani, M. Osti and R. M. Enrici, Radiat Oncol. 6, 158 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. B. G. Baumert, P. Egli, S. Studer, C. Dehing and J. B. Davis, Radiother. Oncol. 74, 61 (2005).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. E. Tryggestad et al., Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 80, 281 (2011).

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. K. Ohtakara et al., Radiother Oncol. 102, 198 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. M. Guckenberger, J. Roesch, K. Baier, R. A. Sweeney and M. Flentje, Radiat. Oncol. 7, 63 (2012).

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. A. Theelen et al., Strahlenther. Onkol. 188, 84 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. G. Ingrosso et al., Radiother. Oncol. 7, 54 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. I. Ali et al., J. Appl. Clin. Med. Phys. 11, 3192 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eng Chan Kim.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Baek, J.G., Jang, H.S., Oh, Y.K. et al. Evaluation of setup uncertainties for single-fraction SRS by comparing two different mask-creation methods. Journal of the Korean Physical Society 67, 38–43 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.67.38

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.67.38

Keywords

Navigation