Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the inter-fraction reproducibility and intra-fraction stability of breast radiotherapy using voluntary deep-inspiration breath hold (DIBH) and free breathing (FB) based on an optical surface imaging system (OSIS). METHODS: Seventeen patients (510 breath-hold sessions) treated using a field-in-field (FiF) technique and twenty patients (600 breath-free sessions) treated with a volume-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique were included in this retrospective study. All the patients were positioned with the guidance of CBCT and OSIS, and also monitored with OSIS throughout the whole treatment session. Eight setup variations in three directions were extracted from the treatment reports of OSIS for all sessions and were subsequently manually introduced to treatment plans, resulting in a total of 296 perturbed plans. All perturbed plans were recalculated, and the dose volume histograms (DVH) for the target and organs at risk (OAR) were analyzed. RESULTS: The OSIS and CBCT for both DIBH and FB treatments showed a good agreement of less than 0.30 cm in each direction. The intra-fraction respiratory motion data during DIBH were -0.06 ± 0.07 cm, 0.12 ± 0.15 cm, and 0.12 ± 0.12 cm in the lateral, longitudinal, and vertical directions, respectively; for FB, the respiratory motion data were -0.02 ± 0.12 cm, 0.08 ± 0.18 cm, and 0.14 ± 0.20 cm, respectively. For the target, DIBH plans were more sensitive to setup errors; the mean deviations in D(95) for CTV were 39.78 Gy-40.17 Gy for DIBH and 38.46 Gy-40.52 Gy for FB, respectively. For the OARs, the mean deviations of V(10), V(20), and D(mean) to the heart; V(5), V(20), and D(mean) to the ipsilateral lung; and D(mean) to the breast were lower for the FB plan compared with the DIBH plan. CONCLUSION: Based on OSIS, our results indicate that both DIBH and FB can provide good reproducibility in the inter-fractions and stability in the intra-fractions. When the patient respiratory motion is large, the FB technology has greater possibility for the undercoverage of the target volume, while DIBH technology is more likely to result in increases in dose to OARs (the lung, heart, and contralateral breast).