Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-kl59c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-19T10:31:29.412Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Slant board immobilisation of head-and-neck radiotherapy patients who cannot tolerate a flat position

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2016

Song Qu
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco
Lisa Singer
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco
Josephine Chen
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco
Erin Shugard
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco
Adam A. Garsa
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco
Sue S. Yom*
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, San Francisco
*
Correspondence to: Sue S. Yom, Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California San Francisco, 1600 Divisadero St, Suite H1031, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA. Tel: 415 353 7175. Fax: 415 353 9883. E-mail: yoms@radonc.ucsf.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Purpose

Patients treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for head-and-neck cancer are often positioned supine on a carbon fibre board to which a thermoplastic mask is attached to immobilise the head and shoulders. For patients unable to tolerate a supine position, we developed a tilting board that accommodates a full-scale head-and-shoulder mask.

Materials and methods

Phantom measurements were obtained to confirm the dosimetric accuracy of our treatment planning system when using this board. A patient was simulated in the flat and tilted positions on the board. The two corresponding treatment plans were evaluated by comparing the target coverage and doses with organs at risk. The patient’s intra-fraction motion was quantified during his tilted treatments.

Results

Phantom measurements confirmed the accuracy of the dosimetric calculations. The tilted plan met dosimetric standards for clinical acceptability. The intra-fraction motion of the patient in the tilted position was >3 mm in any direction.

Conclusions

The tilting board met clinical requirements for IMRT planning and delivery. Full-scale head-and-shoulder immobilisation was achieved in a more tolerable tilted position.

Information

Type
Technical Note
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2016 
Figure 0

Figure 1 Tilting base board and head-and-neck adapter plate.

Figure 1

Table 1 Comparison of dosimetric parameters between plans created in flat and tilted positions

Figure 2

Figure 2 Sagittal computed tomographic slices of the patient in the flat (left) and tilted (right) position. Notes: The shaded blue contour is the PTV6000. The following isodose lines are displayed: 6,600 cGy (red), 6,000 cGy (yellow), 5,600 cGy (green) and 4,500 cGy (cyan). Abbreviation: PTV, planning target volume.

Figure 3

Table 2 Estimated intra-fraction motion obtained from the difference in the shifts required to align pre- and post-treatment cone-beam computed tomographic scans, taken approximately once per week (mm)