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.

Patient Cranial Angle and Intrafractional Stability in CyberKnife Robotic Radiosurgery: A Retrospective Analysis

A mini review of plan quality and secondary cancer risk in CyberKnife M6 radiosurgery for benign intracranial tumors

Study on Motion Management of Pancreatic Cancer Treated by CyberKnife

Dosimetric quality and delivery efficiency of robotic radiosurgery for brain metastases: Comparison with C-arm linear accelerator based plans.

Influence of Clinical and Tumor Factors on Interfraction Setup Errors with Rotation Correction for Vacuum Cushion in Lung Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy

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

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

Calculating Optic Nerve Planning Organ at Risk Volume Margins for Stereotactic Radiosurgery Using Optic Nerve Motion determined using MRI

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

In Silico Studies of the Impact of Rotational Errors on Translation Shifts and Dose Distribution in Image-Guided Radiotherapy.

Influence of Using a Contrast-Enhanced CT Image as the Primary Image on CyberKnife Brain Radiosurgery Treatment Plans

Assessment of Delivery Quality Assurance for Stereotactic Radiosurgery With Cyberknife

[Assessments Setup Errors and Target Margin by 6D Couch for Primary Cervical Cancer].

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

Feasibility of patient‐specific quality assurance (PSQA) for real‐time robotic stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) based on tumor motion traces

Performance Evaluation of a CyberKnife VSITM System

Comparison of Ray Tracing and Monte Carlo Calculation Algorithms for Spine Lesions Treated With CyberKnife

Cyberknife Radiotherapy on Dose Distribution of Targets: Effect of Different Treatment Paths on Medical Image Diagnostics.

Multiple Brain Metastases Radiosurgery with CyberKnife Device: Dosimetric Comparison between Fixed/Iris and Multileaf Collimator Plans

Influence of Different Image-Guided Tracking Methods Upon the Local Efficacy of Cyberknife Treatment in Lung Tumors

Evaluation of a novel patient-specific quality assurance phantom for robotic single-isocentre, multiple-target stereotactic radiosurgery, and stereotactic radiotherapy