Dear Authors,
If you believe that your paper was mistakenly rejected by other leading journals and you do not agree with final decision, the editors of Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy offer new fast track review. You may submit your manuscript to Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy together with all prior peer-reviews obtained from the other journal and your rebuttal letter. We guarantee review based decision within 72 hours from the time we will receive your manuscript.

Fast track submission process: Please submit the manuscript with all reviews and rebuttal letter by email to Dr. Michal Masternak (michal.masternak@ucf.edu) for fast review processing. To assure immediate attention the email title must to include: RPOR-fast track- Last Name First Name (of corresponding author).

Volume 6, Number 4, 2001

Evaluation of an electronic portal imaging device (target view, GE) as a quality assurance tool.

Milecki P, Nawrocki S, Malicki J, Stryczyńska G.

Summary:

Purpose: A proper control of the geometrical accuracy of treated portals during radiotherapy results in higher quality of treatment and may lead to the increase in the therapeutic gain. In this work, an evaluation of an electronic portal imaging device (EPID) was made in the following aspects: the quality of images, the estimation of prolongation of the treatment, and the corrections introduced after EPIDs.
Material and methods: We have archived 2430 portal images of 184 patients who were irradiated at our department. The following significant errors were established: a shift in the field along x, y, z axes (more than 5mm in the head and neck region, more than 7mm in the chest tumours and 10 mm in pelvic region), a displacement of shield by the same values, and an erroneous field size assigment by more than 10mm.
Results: The introduction of the EPID into clinical practice involved approximately 10% of the session time. The quality of the electronic portal images received was acceptable for further analysis in 87% of the analysed group of patients. Significant errors have been registered in 33% of monitored patients. Prior to the treatment and during the set-up procedure, corrections were made in 20% of the evaluated patients.
Conclusions: An electronic portal imaging device (EPID) is a useful tool for fast and reliable portal image acquisition.

Signature: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, 2001; 6(4) : 169-172

FULL TXT (PDF: 0,10MB)

« back

 
INDEXED IN:

Indexed in: EMBASE®, the Excerpta Medica database, the Elsevier BIOBASE (Current Awareness in Biological Sciences) and in the Index Copernicus.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/15071367/19/2