S2917
RTT- RTT operational practice and workflow innovations
ESTRO 2026
Material/Methods:
Conclusion: Consensus was reached that the medium- and high- dose CBCT presets, combined with IRIS reconstruction, were preferred for use in an online adaptive workflow. IRIS reconstruction modestly improves visualization of pelvic organs and was selected as the preferred reconstruction method for contour adaptation in online adaptive workflows. References: 1. Jonathan H Mason et al 2018 Phys. Med. Biol.63 2250012. Precht et al 2019 Radiographers’ perspectives’ on Visual Grading Analysis as a scientific method to evaluate image quality. Radiography 25, S14–S18 Keywords: XVI, Cone-beam Enhancing patient comfort during MRI treatment planning for head and neck cancer using pre- simulation with a 3D-printed coil model Mia T Nguyen 1 , Zahraa Majid 1 , Emil D O’Sullivan 2 , Elisabeth L Juhl 1 , Anne K Due 1,3 , Ivan R Vogelius 1,4 1 Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. 2 Department of IT and Medical Technology, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. 3 Department of Clinical Physiology and Nuclear Medicine, Copenhagen University Hospital, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. 4 Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark Purpose/Objective: MRI treatment planning with mask fixation can be challenging forhead and neck cancer patients due todiscomfort from the narrow bore, mask fixation, coils, scan duration, and noise. These factors may lead to scan interruptions or the need for sedatives.This study investigates whether simulating MRI conditionsprior toscanningimprovespatient experienceand reducesint erruptions and need for sedatives. Digital Poster Highlight 2109
We3D-printed amodel of a Siemens Healthineers coil(UltraFlex Large 18 A 3T Tim Coil)used for head and neckscanning (fig. 1). For the simulation of a small UltraFlexcoil, we used a bolus that matched the weight of the coil.At the mask molding appointment, patients received standard information about the treatment coursesupported by images of the scan set- up (fig. 2). During mask drying, the 3D-printed modelwas placed over the head and neck, and theflex coil simulator was placed on the patient’s chest.Evaluation of the simulation included: a prospective questionnaire survey with separate forms for patients and staff, and a retrospective data collection, both planned toinclude41 patients.The patient questionnaire contains questions addressingthe patient’s experience of the simulation. The staff questionnaireassessesthe patient’s ability to complete the scan. The prospective part began in June 2025.The retrospectivereview included patients whoun derwent mask fixationfor cancer in the head and neckareaand MRI scan for treatmentplanningbetweenFeb1, 2024, and Apr 3, 2025.Weintend to adopt the simulation as standard procedure if 25% reportimprovedexperience. Results: At time of submission, 10 patients had been included (1 woman, 9 men; age 41-83 years).All 10 patients completed the scan, all without sedatives: 8/10patients reported that the simulation made a difference in their experience of the scan.9/10reported that simulation with the 3D-printed model was meaningful while 2/10found both the model and viewing images of the simulation and MRI set-up meaningful.In the retrospective group, 7/41 were unable to complete the scan and 8/41required sedatives (p~0.3 comparing both proportions to the 0/10 with simulation). Conclusion: After simulation with the 3D-printed model, all
Made with FlippingBook - Share PDF online