[Errors in positioning the patient during transcutaneous radiotherapy of the pelvis].

INTRODUCTION

Quality controls in radiotherapy allow to check the correct running of treatment units and to test our procedures. Portal films taken during the first treatment session are used in quality assurance programs to compare scheduled to administered doses.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

To analyze the accuracy of patient positioning in pelvic cancer irradiation, a retrospective study was carried out on 50 treatment schedules carried out at the Radiotherapy Department of S. Anna Hospital (Como, Italy) from June to December, 1996. We checked field mispositioning for correlations with patient or treatment variables, such as patient age, sex, weight, thickness, or unit type. We took one portal film at the first treatment session and checked field positioning by measuring the distance of the isocenter from fixed anatomical structures on the simulation film and on the portal film taken in anteroposterior and lateral projections.

RESULTS

Four vectors were defined to evaluate field mispositioning along right-left (ADS), craniocaudal (ACC, LCC) and anteroposterior (AP) directions. The average values of these four vectors were respectively 2.94, 5.23, 5.54 and 3.20 mm. We found a major shift in field centering leftward and toward the patient's feet. To obtain more information about the total isocenter displacement, a vector T was calculated by summing the vectors ADS, ACC and LAP; a further evidence of field mispositioning is given by the vector T mean value (8.66 +/- 4.95 mm). No correlation was found between vector T values and any patient or treatment variable.

DISCUSSION

The acquaintance with uncertainties requires adequate statistical tools. A single check at treatment beginning could show a systematic error, but not the random fluctuations which can be recognized only with periodic portal films. To correct a possible systematic error without likely worsening set-up conditions, an adequate threshold value must be chosen for field mispositioning, according to each center's historical data.

CONCLUSION

One portal film at the beginning of treatment is the minimum requirement in a quality assurance program. We feel the need to change our protocol and acquire more than one portal film, because the higher the number of portal films the easier the distinction of systematic from random errors. Using serial portal films, all at the first session, we will be able to introduce quantitative criteria for various action levels.