Abstract:Purpose and objectives: This IRB-approved study was to compare the residual inter-fractional setup errors and intra-fractional motion of patients treated with cranial stereotactic radiosurgery without a 6 degree of freedom (DoF) couch. We evaluated both frameless non-invasive vacuum-suction immobilization (Aktina PinPoint) and TALON rigid screw immobilization. Materials and methods: Twenty consecutive patients treated by Varian TrueBeam STX or Tomotherapy were selected for data collection. The dose and number of fractions received by each patient ranged from 18 Gy in 1 fraction (SRS) to 25 Gy in 5 fractions (SRT). Twelve patients were immobilized using PinPoint, a frameless suction system (Aktina Medical, New York) and eight patients were immobilized using the TALON rigid screw system. Customized head cushions were used for all patients. Six Atkina patients received pre- and post-treatment cone-beam CT (CBCT) to evaluate the intra-fractional motion of the Aktina system. The intra-fractional motion with the TALON rigid screw system has been reported to be negligible and was not repeated in this study. All patients received pre-treatment CBCT or megavoltage CT (MVCT) to assess inter-fractional setup accuracy. Shifts to the final treatment position were determined based on matching bony anatomy in the pre-treatment setup CT and the planning CT. Setup CT and planning CT were registered retrospectively based on bony anatomy using image registration software to quantify rotational and translational errors. Results: For the frameless Aktina system, mean and standard deviation of the intra-fractional motion were -0.5 ± 0.7 mm (lateral), 0.1 ± 0.9 mm (vertical), -0.5 ± 0.6 mm (longitudinal), -0.04 ± 0.18°(pitch), -0.1 ± 0.23°(yaw), and -0.03 ± 0.17°(roll) indicating negligible intra-fractional motion. Inter-fractional rotation errors were -0.10 ± 0.25° (pitch), -0.08 ± 0.16° (yaw), and -0.20 ± 0.41° (roll) for TALON rigid screw immobilization versus 0.20 ± 0.69° (pitch), 0.34 ± 0.56° (yaw), 0.35 ± 0.82° (roll) for frameless vacuum-suction immobilization showing that the rigid immobilization setup is more reproducible than the frameless immobilization. Without rotational correction by a 6 DoF couch, residual registration error exists and increases with distance from the image fusion center. In a 3D vector space, a tumor located 5 cm from the center of image fusion would require a 0.9 mm margin with the TALON system and a 2.1 mm margin with Aktina. Conclusions: With image-guided radiotherapy, translational setup errors can be corrected by image registration between pre-treatment setup CT and planning CT. However, rotational errors cannot be accounted for without a 6 DoF couch. Our study showed that the frameless Aktina immobilization system provided negligible intra-fractional motion. The inter-fractional rotation setup error using Aktina was larger than rigid immobilization with the TALON system. To treat a single lesion far from the center of image registration or for multiple lesions in a single plan, additional margin may be needed to account for the uncorrectable rotational setup errors.

SU‐FF‐T‐167: Dose Perturbation from Head Frame at Gamma Knife Stereotactic Radiosurgery

SU‐FF‐T‐247: Implementation of MRI‐Based Monte Carlo Simulation for Gamma Knife SRS

Evaluation Of The Dosimetric Impact Of Interfractional Anatomical Variations On Prostate Proton Therapy Using Daily In-Room Ct Images

SU‐FF‐T‐405: Impact of Tissue Heterogeneities Upon Dose Delivery to Lung Lesions and Comparison of BrainSCAN Treatment Planning System Dose Calculations

Geometric and dosimetric consequences of intra-fractional movement in single isocenter non-coplanar stereotactic radiosurgery

Evaluating the positional uncertainty of intrafraction, adjacent fields, and daily setup with the BrainLAB ExacTrac system in patients who are receiving craniospinal irradiation.

Simulation of dosimetric consequences of intrafraction variation of tumor drift in lung cancer stereotactic body radiotherapy

SU‐E‐T‐318: the Effect of Patient Positioning Errors on Target Coverage and Cochlear Dose in Stereotactic Radiosurgery Treatment of Acoustic Neuromas

Dose Calculation Deviations Induced by Fractional Image-Guided-couch-shifts for Varian Halcyon MV Cone Beam CT

Technical Note: Induced radioactivity in stereotactic body radiation therapy with a flattening‐filter‐free 10 MV beam model

Discrepancies between frame- and CBCT-based stereotactic space definition on the Gamma Knife Icon

Quantifying dose uncertainties resulting from cardiorespiratory motion in intensity-modulated proton therapy for cardiac stereotactic body radiotherapy

Residual setup errors in cranial stereotactic radiosurgery without six degree of freedom robotic couch: Frameless versus rigid immobilization systems

Quantification of Dosimetry Improvement With or Without Patient Surface Guidance

Impact of the skull contour definition on Leksell Gamma Knife® Icon™ radiosurgery treatment planning

The Dosimetric Impact of Shifts in Patient Positioning during Boron Neutron Capture Therapy for Brain Tumors

Analysis Of Radiation Dose Distribution Inhomogenity Effects In Gamma Knife Radiosurgery Using Geant4

[Dosimetric Effect of Patient Arm Position on Cyberknife Radiosurgery for Spinal Tumors].

Dosimetric Systems in Pre-Treatment QA for Stereotactic Treatments: Correlation Agreements and Target Volume Dependency

SU-GG-T-347: Methods to Calculate Organ Doses Due to Scattered Radiation From External Beam Radiation Treatment Using Various Patient Phantoms and Monte Carlo Simulations

Impact of respiratory motion on proton pencil beam scanning FLASH radiotherapy: an in silico and phantom measurement study