Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/8859
Title: A comparison between electronic portal imaging device and cone beam CT in radiotherapy verification of nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Authors: Wu, WCV 
Leung, WS
Kay, SS
Cheung, HC
Wah, YK
Keywords: Cone-beam CT
Electronic portal imaging device
Nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Positional error
Issue Date: 2011
Publisher: Elsevier Science Inc
Source: Medical dosimetry, 2011, v. 36, no. 1, p. 109-112 How to cite?
Journal: Medical Dosimetry 
Abstract: The demand of greater accuracy in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) has driven the development of more advanced verification systems. The purpose of this study is to investigate the differences in verification accuracy in terms of the position error detected between cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and electronic portal imaging device (EPID) in the IMRT of nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). Two groups of NPC patients (n = 22 and n = 28) verified by CBCT (G1-CB), EPID (G1-EP), and EPID (G2-EP) only, respectively, were recruited. The positional errors between the G1-CB group and the G2-EP group were compared. In addition, the magnitudes of the position errors of EPID taken in the same session of the CBCT, but after necessary corrections (G1-EP), were analyzed. In the CBCT group, 455 CBCT images (G1-CB) and 206 EPID images (G1-EP) were collected, whereas 319 EPID images (G2-EP) for the EPID group, were recorded. The median position errors detected in CBCT were between 0.80 and 0.90 mm in the antero-posterior (A-P), left-right (L-R), and supero-inferior (S-I) directions, whereas those of the EPID were all 0.50 mm. The magnitude of position deviation detected by the CBCT was higher than that of the EPID and their differences were extremely significant (p < 0.001). The frequencies in the G2-EP group with position errors greater than the tolerance (2 mm) were 32, 42, and 27 in the A-P, L-R, and S-I directions, respectively, which accounted for 16.5%, 21.6%, and 13.9% of the total number of EPID. There was difference in verification capability between the CBCT and EPID when applied to IMRT of NPC patients. Because an average of 1 of 6 verifications in EPID was inferior to that of the CBCT, verification by CBCT is recommended.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/8859
ISSN: 0958-3947
DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2010.01.005
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article

Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show full item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

3
Last Week
0
Last month
0
Citations as of Oct 4, 2017

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

1
Last Week
0
Last month
0
Citations as of Oct 14, 2017

Page view(s)

42
Last Week
1
Last month
Checked on Oct 15, 2017

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.