Premium
INTER‐ AND INTRAFRACTION MOTION FOR STEREOTACTIC RADIOSURGERY IN DOGS AND CATS USING A MODIFIED BRAINLAB FRAMELESS STEREOTACTIC MASK SYSTEM
Author(s) -
Dieterich Sonja,
Zwingenberger Allison,
Hansen Katherine,
Pfeiffer Isabella,
Théon Alain,
Kent Michael S.
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
veterinary radiology and ultrasound
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.541
H-Index - 60
eISSN - 1740-8261
pISSN - 1058-8183
DOI - 10.1111/vru.12271
Subject(s) - medicine , cats , brachycephaly , radiosurgery , nuclear medicine , radiology , radiation therapy , surgery , skull
Precise and accurate patient positioning is necessary when doing stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) to ensure adequate dosing to the tumor and sparing of normal tissues. This prospective cross‐sectional study aimed to assess feasibility of a commercially available modified frameless SRS positioning system for use in veterinary radiotherapy patients with brain tumors. Fifty‐one dogs and 12 cats were enrolled. Baseline and verification CT images were acquired. The verification CT images from 32 dogs and five cats had sufficient images for fusion to baseline CT images. A rigid box‐based fusion was performed to determine interfraction motion. Forty‐eight dogs and 11 cats were assessed for intrafraction motion by cine CT. Seventy percent of dogs and 60% of cats had interfraction 3D vector translational shifts >1 mm, with mean values of 1.9 mm in dogs, and 1.8 mm in cats. In dogs muscle wasting was weakly correlated with translational shifts. The maximum angular interfraction motion observed was 6.3° (roll), 3.5° (pitch), and 3.3° (yaw). There was no correlation between angular interfraction motion and weight, brachycephaly, or muscle wasting. Fifty‐seven percent of dogs and 50% of cats had respiration‐related intrafraction motion. Of these, 4.5% of dogs and 10% of cats had intrafraction motion >1 mm. This study demonstrates the modified Brainlab system is feasible for SRS in dogs and cats. The smaller cranial size and difference in anatomy increases setup uncertainty in some animals beyond limits usually accepted in SRS. Image‐guided positioning is recommended to achieve clinically acceptable setup accuracy (<1 mm) for SRS.