6 resultados para Patient Positioning
em BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça
Resumo:
Whole-body computed tomography (WBCT) plays an important role in the management of severely injured patients. We evaluated the radiation exposure of WBCT scans using different positioning boards and arm positions.
Resumo:
Abstract Introduction Vertebroplasty (VP) is a cost-efficient alternative to kyphoplasty; however, regarding safety and vertebral body (VB) height restoration, it is considered inferior. We assessed the safety and efficacy of VP in alleviating pain, improving quality of life (QoL) and restoring alignment. Methods In a prospective monocenter case series from May 2007 until July 2008, there were 1,408 vertebroplasties performed during 319 interventions in 306 patients with traumatic, lytic and osteoporotic fractures. The 249 interventions in 233 patients performed because of osteoporotic vertebral fractures were analyzed regarding demographics, treatment and radiographic details, pain alleviation (VAS), QoL improvement (NASS and EQ-5D), complications and predictors for new fractures requiring a reoperation. Results The osteoporotic patient sample consisted of 76.7% (179) females with a median age of 80 years. A total of 54 males had a median age of 77 years. On average, there were 1.8 VBs fractured and 5 VBs treated. The preoperative pain was assessed by the visual analog scale (VAS) and decreased from 54.9 to 40.4 pts after 2 months and 31.2 pts after 6 months. Accordingly, the QoL on the EQ-5D measure (−0.6 to 1) improved from 0.35 pts before surgery to 0.56 pts after 2 and to 0.68 pts after 6 months. The preoperative Beck Index (anterior height/posterior height) improved from a mean of 0.64 preoperative to 0.76 postoperative, remained stable at 2 months and slightly deteriorated to 0.72 at 6 months postoperatively. There were cement leakages in 26% of the fractured VBs and in 1.4% of the prophylactically cemented VBs; there were symptoms in 4.3%, and most of them were temporary hypotension and one pulmonary cement embolism that remained asymptomatic. The univariate regression model revealed a tendency for a reduced risk for new or refractures on radiographs (OR = 2.61, 95% CI 0.92–7.38, p = 0.12) and reoperations (OR = 2.9, 95% CI 0.94–8.949, p = 0.1) when prophylactic augmentation was performed. The final multivariate regression model revealed male patients to have an about three times higher refracture risk (radiographic) (OR = 2.78, p = 0.02) at 6 months after surgery. Patients with a lumbar index fracture had an about three to five times higher refracture/reoperation risk than patients with a thoracic (OR = 0.33/0.35, p = 0.009/0.01) or thoracolumbar (OR = 0.32/0.22, p = 0.099/0.01) index fracture. Conclusion If routinely used, VP is a safe and efficacious treatment option for osteoporotic vertebral fractures with regard to pain relief and improvement of the QoL. Even segmental realignment can be partially achieved with proper patient positioning. Certain patient or fracture characteristics increase the risk for early radiographic refractures or new fractures, or a reoperation; a consequent prophylactic augmentation showed protective tendencies, but the study was underpowered for a final conclusion.
Resumo:
Today electronic portal imaging devices (EPID's) are used primarily to verify patient positioning. They have, however, also the potential as 2D-dosimeters and could be used as such for transit dosimetry or dose reconstruction. It has been proven that such devices, especially liquid filled ionization chambers, have a stable dose response relationship which can be described in terms of the physical properties of the EPID and the pulsed linac radiation. For absolute dosimetry however, an accurate method of calibration to an absolute dose is needed. In this work, we concentrate on calibration against dose in a homogeneous water phantom. Using a Monte Carlo model of the detector we calculated dose spread kernels in units of absolute dose per incident energy fluence and compared them to calculated dose spread kernels in water at different depths. The energy of the incident pencil beams varied between 0.5 and 18 MeV. At the depth of dose maximum in water for a 6 MV beam (1.5 cm) and for a 18 MV beam (3.0 cm) we observed large absolute differences between water and detector dose above an incident energy of 4 MeV but only small relative differences in the most frequent energy range of the beam energy spectra. It is shown that for a 6 MV beam the absolute reference dose measured at 1.5 cm water depth differs from the absolute detector dose by 3.8%. At depth 1.2 cm in water, however, the relative dose differences are almost constant between 2 and 6 MeV. The effects of changes in the energy spectrum of the beam on the dose responses in water and in the detector are also investigated. We show that differences larger than 2% can occur for different beam qualities of the incident photon beam behind water slabs of different thicknesses. It is therefore concluded that for high-precision dosimetry such effects have to be taken into account. Nevertheless, the precise information about the dose response of the detector provided in this Monte Carlo study forms the basis of extracting directly the basic radiometric quantities photon fluence and photon energy fluence from the detector's signal using a deconvolution algorithm. The results are therefore promising for future application in absolute transit dosimetry and absolute dose reconstruction.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND Neuronavigation has become an intrinsic part of preoperative surgical planning and surgical procedures. However, many surgeons have the impression that accuracy decreases during surgery. OBJECTIVE To quantify the decrease of neuronavigation accuracy and identify possible origins, we performed a retrospective quality-control study. METHODS Between April and July 2011, a neuronavigation system was used in conjunction with a specially prepared head holder in 55 consecutive patients. Two different neuronavigation systems were investigated separately. Coregistration was performed with laser-surface matching, paired-point matching using skin fiducials, anatomic landmarks, or bone screws. The initial target registration error (TRE1) was measured using the nasion as the anatomic landmark. Then, after draping and during surgery, the accuracy was checked at predefined procedural landmark steps (Mayfield measurement point and bone measurement point), and deviations were recorded. RESULTS After initial coregistration, the mean (SD) TRE1 was 2.9 (3.3) mm. The TRE1 was significantly dependent on patient positioning, lesion localization, type of neuroimaging, and coregistration method. The following procedures decreased neuronavigation accuracy: attachment of surgical drapes (DTRE2 = 2.7 [1.7] mm), skin retractor attachment (DTRE3 = 1.2 [1.0] mm), craniotomy (DTRE3 = 1.0 [1.4] mm), and Halo ring installation (DTRE3 = 0.5 [0.5] mm). Surgery duration was a significant factor also; the overall DTRE was 1.3 [1.5] mm after 30 minutes and increased to 4.4 [1.8] mm after 5.5 hours of surgery. CONCLUSION After registration, there is an ongoing loss of neuronavigation accuracy. The major factors were draping, attachment of skin retractors, and duration of surgery. Surgeons should be aware of this silent loss of accuracy when using neuronavigation.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the usefulness of ultrasound imaging to improve the positioning of the recording needle for nerve conduction studies (NCS) of the sural nerve. METHODS: Orthodromic NCS of the sural nerve was performed in 44 consecutive patients evaluated for polyneuropathy. Ultrasound-guided needle positioning (USNP) was compared to conventional "blind" needle positioning (BNP), electrically guided needle positioning (EGNP), and to recordings with surface electrodes (SFN). RESULTS: The mean distance between the needle tip and the nerve was 1.1 mm with USNP compared to 5.1 mm with BNP (p<0.0001). The mean amplitude of the sensory nerve action potential (SNAP) was 21 microV with USNP and 11 microV with BNP (p<0.0001). Compared to BNP, nerve-needle distances and SNAP amplitudes did not improve with EGNP. SNAP amplitudes recorded with SFN were significantly smaller than with BNP, EGNP and USNP. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound increases the precision of needle positioning markedly, compared to conventional methods. The amplitude of the recorded SNAP is usually clearly greater using USNP. In addition, USNP is faster, less painful and less dependent on the patient. SIGNIFICANCE: USNP is superior to BNP, EGNP, and SFN in accurate measurement of SNAP amplitude. It has a potential use in the routine near-nerve needle sensory NCS of pure sensory nerves.
Resumo:
PURPOSE The range of patient setup errors in six dimensions detected in clinical routine for cranial as well as for extracranial treatments, were analyzed while performing linear accelerator based stereotactic treatments with frameless patient setup systems. Additionally, the need for re-verification of the patient setup for situations where couch rotations are involved was analyzed for patients treated in the cranial region. METHODS AND MATERIALS A total of 2185 initial (i.e. after pre-positioning the patient with the infrared system but before image guidance) patient setup errors (1705 in the cranial and 480 in the extracranial region) obtained by using ExacTrac (BrainLAB AG, Feldkirchen, Germany) were analyzed. Additionally, the patient setup errors as a function of the couch rotation angle were obtained by analyzing 242 setup errors in the cranial region. Before the couch was rotated, the patient setup error was corrected at couch rotation angle 0° with the aid of image guidance and the six degrees of freedom (6DoF) couch. For both situations attainment rates for two different tolerances (tolerance A: ± 0.5mm, ± 0.5°; tolerance B: ± 1.0 mm, ± 1.0°) were calculated. RESULTS The mean (± one standard deviation) initial patient setup errors for the cranial cases were -0.24 ± 1.21°, -0.23 ± 0.91° and -0.03 ± 1.07° for the pitch, roll and couch rotation axes and 0.10 ± 1.17 mm, 0.10 ± 1.62 mm and 0.11 ± 1.29 mm for the lateral, longitudinal and vertical axes, respectively. Attainment rate (all six axes simultaneously) for tolerance A was 0.6% and 13.1% for tolerance B, respectively. For the extracranial cases the corresponding values were -0.21 ± 0.95°, -0.05 ± 1.08° and -0.14 ± 1.02° for the pitch, roll and couch rotation axes and 0.15 ± 1.77 mm, 0.62 ± 1.94 mm and -0.40 ± 2.15 mm for the lateral, longitudinal and vertical axes. Attainment rate (all six axes simultaneously) for tolerance A was 0.0% and 3.1% for tolerance B, respectively. After initial setup correction and rotation of the couch to treatment position a re-correction has to be performed in 77.4% of all cases to fulfill tolerance A and in 15.6% of all cases to fulfill tolerance B. CONCLUSION The analysis of the data shows that all six axes of a 6DoF couch are used extensively for patient setup in clinical routine. In order to fulfill high patient setup accuracies (e.g. for stereotactic treatments), a 6DoF couch is recommended. Moreover, re-verification of the patient setup after rotating the couch is required in clinical routine.