Abstract
Purpose
Pelvic radiation treatment demands precision and consistency in patient setup for efficacy of therapy and to limit radiation dosage to normal tissue. Despite the use of immobilization devices and positioning techniques, there is still concern for variation in daily setup. The purpose of this retrospective study was to determine the presence and degree of variation in sacral slope in 20 subjects receiving radiation therapy for pelvic malignancies.
Methods
Each of the 20 subjects received between 20 and 25 fractions of external beam radiation treatment to the pelvis. The sacral slope was measured on each of the daily port films taken prior to treatment and compared to the sacral slope angle measured on the initial treatment planning simulation digitally reconstructed radiographic imaging.
Results
Compared to this initial imaging, the average sacral slope variation across all 20 subjects was 2.27° (± 1.43°), and the average variation among patients ranged from 1.22° to 5.09°. Variation in sacral slope across all 20 subjects from one treatment day to the next was 2.05° (± 1.47°), and ranged from 0.97° to 3.21°.
Conclusions
This study demonstrates that despite the rigorous use of immobilization devices, there still exists day-to-day variation in sacral slope angle between treatment days and compared to initial baseline imaging off which the treatment plan is developed. There is an on-going study at our institution with an attempt to reduce this variation by offering exercises prior to radiation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Meyer LA, Bohlke K, Powell MA, Fader AN, Franklin GE, Lee LJ, Matei D, Coallier L, Wright AA. Postoperative radiation therapy for endometrial cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline endorsement of the American Society for Radiation Oncology evidence-based guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(26):2908–13.
Gilhuijs KGA, Van De Ven PJH, Van Herk M. Automatic three-dimensional inspection of patient setup in radiation therapy using portal images, simulator images, and computed tomography data. Med Phys. 1996;23(3):389–99.
Langen KM, Jones DTL Organ motion and its management. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;50(1):265–78.
Jadon, et al. A systematic review of organ motion and image-guided strategies in external beam radiotherapy for cervical cancer. Clin Oncol. 2014;26:185–96.
Mao Y, Hedgire S, Prapruttam D. Imaging of pelvic lymph nodes. Curr Radiol Rep. 2014;2:70.
Taylor A, Rockall AG, Reznek RH, Powell ME. Mapping pelvic lymph nodes: guidelines for delineation in intensity modulated radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;63:5.
Bernard S, Ouellet MP, Moffet H, Roy JS, Dumoulin C. Effects of radiation therapy on the structure and function of the pelvic floor muscles of patients with cancer in the pelvic area: a systematic review. J Cancer Surviv. 2016;10(2):1–12.
Mehmood Q, Beardwood M, Swindell R, Greenhaulgh S, Wareham T, Barraclough L, Livsey J, Davidson SE. Insufficiency fractures in patients treated with pelvic radiotherapy and chemotherapy for uterine and cervical cancer. Eur J Cancer Care. 2014;23:43–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.12105.
Creutzberg CL, Althof VG, de Hoog M, Visser AG, Huizenga H, Wijnmaalen A, Levendag PC. A quality control study of the accuracy of patient positioning in irradiation of pelvic fields. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;34:697–708.
Ahmad R, Hoogeman MS, Quint S, Mens JW, Osorio EMV, Heijmen BJ. Residual setup errors caused by rotation and non-rigid motion in prone-treated cervical cancer patients after online CBCT image-guidance. Radiother Oncol. 2012;103:322–6.
Morris KA, Haboubi NY. Pelvic radiation therapy: between delight and disaster. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2015;7:11.
Kwon JW, Huh SJ, Yoon YC, Choi SH, Jung JY, Oh D, Choe BK. Pelvic bone complications after radiation therapy of uterine cervical cancer: evaluation with MRI. Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191(4):987–9.
Wu J, Haycocks T, Alasti H, Ottewell G, Middlemiss N, Abdolell M, Warde P, Toi A, Catton C. Positioning errors and prostate motion during conformal prostate radiotherapy using on-line isocentre set-up verification and implanted prostate markers. Radiother Oncol. 2001;61(2):127–133.
Morgan TL, Banks DA, Kagan AR. Radiation therapy port films: a quality assurance study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998;42(1):223–7.
Roussouly P, Nnadi C. Sagittal plane deformity: an overview of interpretation and management. Eur Spine J. 2010;19:1824–36.
Shih KK, Folkert MR, Kollmeier MA, Abu-Rustum NR, Sonoda Y, Leitao MM, Brakat RR, Alektiar KM. Pelvic insufficiency fractures in patients with cervical and endometrial cancer treated with postoperative pelvic radiation. Gynecol Oncol. 2013;128(3):540–3.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the staff of the Radiation Oncology department at the University of Massachusetts Memorial Medical Center.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.
Ethical approval
This research was approved by the University of Massachusetts Medical School IRB.
Informed consent
For this type of study (retrospective chart review), formal consent is not required. All the subjects had previously completed the treatment.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Lukez, A., O’Loughlin, L., Bodla, M. et al. Positioning of port films for radiation: variability is present. Med Oncol 35, 77 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-018-1138-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12032-018-1138-z