S2160
Physics - Inter-fraction motion management and daily adaptive radiotherapy
ESTRO 2026
may be due to change in body contour of the patient. Feedback on SGRT using Likert Scale (Median Work efficiency-4, Confidence in Using SGRT-5 and comfort to patient-5) indicates its strong potential for clinical integration. These results Specifically proposes SGRT with CBCT optimizes patient setup and minimizes the need of repeated CBCT imaging throughout the treatment course, thereby reducing the Total treatment time. Conclusion: Both SGRT and CBCT achieve millimetre-level accuracy in patient positioning. The primary advantage of SGRT is its ability to monitor intrafraction motion and detect body contour changes, which reduces the necessity for frequent CBCT imaging-especially for the breast and head and neck and as an aid for the Abdomen/pelvis. This efficiency results in a combined reduction of overall treatment time and imaging dose. References: 1.Freislederer P, Batista V, Öllers M, Buschmann M, Steiner E, Kügele M, Fracchiolla F, Corradini S, De Smet M, Moura F, Perryck S. ESTRO-ACROP guideline on surface guided radiation therapy. Radiotherapy and Oncology. 2022 Aug 1;173:188-96.2.Lastrucci A, Serventi E, Francolini G, Marciello L, Fedeli L, Meucci F, Marzano S, Esposito M, Ricci R. A retrospective comparison of setup accuracy from CBCT and SGRT data in breast cancer patients. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Sciences. 2024 Mar 1;55(1):29- 36.3.Freislederer P, Kügele M, Öllers M, Swinnen A, Sauer TO, Bert C, Giantsoudi D, Corradini S, Batista V. Recent advances in surface guided radiation therapy. Radiation Oncology. 2020 Jul 31;15(1):187. Keywords: SGRT,CBCT,IGRT Optimizing Margin Selection in Spine SBRT: A Systematic Review of Imaging Chain Impact on Treatment Accuracy Silvia Strolin 1 , Agnese Barbareschi 2 , Gina Belmonte 3 , Nina Cavalli 4 , Nunzia Ciscognetti 5 , Anna Delana 6 , Maria Daniela Falco 7 , Marco Fusella 8 , Elena Gallio 9 , Cristina Garibaldi 10 , Francesca Romana Giglioli 9 , Alessia Giuliano 3 , Stefania Linsalata 11 , Lucio Francesco 12 , Pietro Mancosu 13,14 , Emilio Mezzenga 15 , Lisa Milan 16 , Giorgia Nicolini 17 , Luca Pellegri 18 , Lorenzo Radici 19 , Serenella Russo 20 , Miriam Santoro 1 , Ninfa Satariano 21 , Antonella Soriani 22 , Lidia Strigari 1 1 Department of Medical Physics, IRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy. 2 Department of Medical Physics, ASST Spedali Civili di Brescia, Brescia, Italy. 3 Medical Physics Department, San Luca Hospital, Lucca, Italy. 4 Medical Physics Department, HUMANITAS-ICC, Catania, Italy. 5 Medical Physics Unit, ASL2 Liguria Savona, Savona, Italy. Digital Poster 3710
Digital Poster 3632
Comparative analysis of efficiency of SGRT and CBCT based Radiotherapy delivery -A single Institute experience. Tatyasri Garikapati, Yugandhar Sarma Lella, Janardhan Nandigam, Saranganathan Balakrishnan, Ashok M, Chandana M, Saurabh Upadhyay, Sandeep M, Varun U, KoteswarRao Rachakonda Radiation oncology, Renova soumya cancer centre, Hyderabad, India Purpose/Objective: Accurate patient positioning is crucial for precise dose delivery and achieving the desired therapeutic outcome. Surface guided radiotherapy (SGRT) offers an alternative option to conventional laser-based and rigid immobilization setup. This study compares the immobilization accuracy and daily reproducibility of SGRT and CBCT based workflows. Material/Methods: Data register analysis of positional errors in 214 patients, involving different malignancies (i.e., head and neck, thorax, breast, abdomen and pelvis) treated at our institute over a time period from 01/09/2023 to 31/09/2025 was done. Patient setup was achieved through SGRT (C-RAD system) and subsequently verified with CBCT acquired via Varian TrueBeam SVC. Positional discrepancies (Transitional and rotational errors) between the SGRT and CBCT were recorded in 6DOF. Data was collected on day 1, at the mid-point of treatment and on the final day. Statistical analysis using a paired t test was performed to assess the mean difference in the positional errors between the two systems. Additionally, a questionnaire using Likert scale was given to the Radiation therapist to evaluate the ease of use of SGRT in daily practice. Results: The comparison of shifts obtained from SGRT and CBCT showed a statistically significant difference (p=<0.05) in the individual positional analysis during the mid treatment imaging most commonly in the Z (0.5±1mm) and Roll (0.2±0.5 degrees) directions which
Made with FlippingBook - Share PDF online