Anatomical changes in the male pelvis between the supine and upright positions-A feasibility study for prostate treatments in the upright position.

Treating and imaging patients in the upright orientation is gaining acceptance in radiation oncology and radiology and has distinct advantages over the recumbent position. An IRB approved study to investigate the positions and orientations of the male pelvic organs between the supine and upright positions was conducted. The study comprised of scanning 15 male volunteers (aged 55-75 years) on a 0.6 T Fonar MRI scanner in the supine and upright positions with a full bladder and in the upright position with an empty bladder. The Pelvic study revealed that in the upright position the 1. Position and shape of the prostate are not impacted significantly by bladder fill. 2. Distance between the sacrum and the anterior bladder wall is significantly smaller. 3. Anterior-Posterior length and the bladder width is significantly larger. 4. Seminal vesicles are pushed down by the bladder. 5. Top of the penile bulb is further away from the apex of the prostate. These observed differences could positively impact upright prostate treatments by 1. Reducing the risk of small bowel approximating the treatment volume. 2. Prostate treatments can be done with a reduced focus on bladder fill. 3. Radiation beams for treating intermediate risk prostrate can be made smaller or a larger portion of the seminal vesicles can be treated with the same beam size than typically used for supine treatments. 4. Reducing the average dose to the penile bulb.

The use of image synthesis techniques in target and roi delineation in the upright position.

The use of multi-modality imaging technologies such as CT, MRI, and PET imaging is state of the art for radiation therapy treatment planning. Except for a limited number of low magnetic field MR scanners the majority of such imaging technologies can only image the patient in a recumbent position. Delivering radiation therapy treatments with the patient in an upright orientation has many benefits and several companies are now developing upright patient positioners combined with upright diagnostic helical CT scanners to facilitate upright radiation therapy treatments. Due to the directional changes in the gravitational forces on the patient's body, most structures and organs will change position and shape between the recumbent and upright positions. Detailed knowledge about such structures and organs are therefore often only available in the recumbent position. The problem statement is therefore well defined, that is, how do we know where such structures and organs, that is, the target or region at risk volumes, are in the upright position if those cannot be identified and or delineated accurately enough using the upright diagnostic quality CT images only? This paper outlines two methods based on synthetic CT or MR images to overcome this problem.

Measurements of neutron dose equivalent for a proton therapy center using uniform scanning proton beams.

PURPOSE: Neutron exposure is of concern in proton therapy, and varies with beam delivery technique, nozzle design, and treatment conditions. Uniform scanning is an emerging treatment technique in proton therapy, but neutron exposure for this technique has not been fully studied. The purpose of this study is to investigate the neutron dose equivalent per therapeutic dose, H/D, under various treatment conditions for uniform scanning beams employed at our proton therapy center. METHODS: Using a wide energy neutron dose equivalent detector (SWENDI-II, ThermoScientific, MA), the authors measured H/D at 50 cm lateral to the isocenter as a function of proton range, modulation width, beam scanning area, collimated field size, and snout position. They also studied the influence of other factors on neutron dose equivalent, such as aperture material, the presence of a compensator, and measurement locations. They measured H/D for various treatment sites using patient-specific treatment parameters. Finally, they compared H/D values for various beam delivery techniques at various facilities under similar conditions. RESULTS: H/D increased rapidly with proton range and modulation width, varying from about 0.2 mSv/Gy for a 5 cm range and 2 cm modulation width beam to 2.7 mSv/Gy for a 30 cm range and 30 cm modulation width beam when 18 × 18 cm(2) uniform scanning beams were used. H/D increased linearly with the beam scanning area, and decreased slowly with aperture size and snout retraction. The presence of a compensator reduced the H/D slightly compared with that without a compensator present. Aperture material and compensator material also have an influence on neutron dose equivalent, but the influence is relatively small. H/D varied from about 0.5 mSv/Gy for a brain tumor treatment to about 3.5 mSv/Gy for a pelvic case. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents H/D as a function of various treatment parameters for uniform scanning proton beams. For similar treatment conditions, the H/D value per uncollimated beam size for uniform scanning beams was slightly lower than that from a passive scattering beam and higher than that from a pencil beam scanning beam, within a factor of 2. Minimizing beam scanning area could effectively reduce neutron dose equivalent for uniform scanning beams, down to the level close to pencil beam scanning.