Setup in a clinical workflow and impact on radiotherapy routine of an in vivo dosimetry procedure with an electronic portal imaging device.

Publisher: Public Library of Science Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101285081 Publication Model: eCollection Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1932-6203 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 19326203 NLM ISO Abbreviation: PLoS One Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: San Francisco, CA : Public Library of Science

Radiotherapy Dosage*; Radiotherapy/*methods; Humans

High conformal techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy are widely used in overloaded radiotherapy departments. In vivo dosimetric screening is essential in this environment to avoid important dosimetric errors. This work examines the feasibility of introducing in vivo dosimetry (IVD) checks in a radiotherapy routine. The causes of dosimetric disagreements between delivered and planned treatments were identified and corrected during the course of treatment. The efficiency of the corrections performed and the added workload needed for the entire procedure were evaluated. The IVD procedure was based on an electronic portal imaging device. A total of 3682 IVD tests were performed for 147 patients who underwent head and neck, abdomen, pelvis, breast, and thorax radiotherapy treatments. Two types of indices were evaluated and used to determine if the IVD tests were within tolerance levels: the ratio R between the reconstructed and planned isocentre doses and a transit dosimetry based on the γ-analysis of the electronic portal images. The causes of test outside tolerance level were investigated and corrected and IVD test was repeated during subsequent fraction. The time needed for each step of the IVD procedure was registered. Pelvis, abdomen, and head and neck treatments had 10% of tests out of tolerance whereas breast and thorax treatments accounted for up to 25%. The patient setup was the main cause of 90% of the IVD tests out of tolerance and the remaining 10% was due to patient morphological changes. An average time of 42 min per day was sufficient to monitor a daily workload of 60 patients in treatment. This work shows that IVD performed with an electronic portal imaging device is feasible in an overloaded department and enables the timely realignment of the treatment quality indices in order to achieve a patient's final treatment compliant with the one prescribed.

Med Phys. 2014 Dec;41(12):121702. (PMID: 25471949)
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016 May 08;17 (3):262-276. (PMID: 27167283)
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Apr 1;67(5):1568-77. (PMID: 17394951)
Med Phys. 2013 Jul;40(7):070903. (PMID: 23822404)
Pract Radiat Oncol. 2015 Nov-Dec;5(6):e679-87. (PMID: 26421834)
Med Phys. 2009 Sep;36(9):4197-212. (PMID: 19810494)
Phys Med. 2016 Jan;32(1):52-8. (PMID: 26511150)
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2016 Aug 1;95(5):1513-1519. (PMID: 27262359)
Am J Clin Oncol. 2012 Dec;35(6):612-7. (PMID: 23165357)
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2016 Aug;15(4):535-45. (PMID: 26134437)
Phys Med. 2011 Jan;27(1):1-10. (PMID: 20615735)
Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2017 Mar 13;30(2):90-102. (PMID: 28256929)
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Feb 1;64(2):355-62. (PMID: 16256277)
Strahlenther Onkol. 2015 Dec;191(12):970-8. (PMID: 26403913)
Med Phys. 2010 Jun;37(6):2638-44. (PMID: 20632575)
Radiat Oncol. 2016 Aug 12;11(1):106. (PMID: 27520279)
Med Phys. 2010 Jun;37(6):2516-24. (PMID: 20632563)
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012 Nov 1;84(3):e263-9. (PMID: 22682808)
Med Phys. 2014 Jun;41(6):062103. (PMID: 24877830)
Phys Med. 2007 Mar;23(1):25-32. (PMID: 17568540)
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2017 Apr 1;97(5):1077-1084. (PMID: 28332992)
Med Phys. 1998 May;25(5):656-61. (PMID: 9608475)
Med Phys. 2006 Nov;33(11):4414-22. (PMID: 17153420)
Med Phys. 2009 Jun;36(6):2206-14. (PMID: 19610309)

Dryad 10.5061/dryad.jv98k

Date Created: 20180213 Date Completed: 20180406 Latest Revision: 20181113

20231215

PMC5809064

10.1371/journal.pone.0192686

29432473