Webster, Amanda;
Mundora, Yemurai;
Clark, Catharine H;
Hawkins, Maria A;
(2024)
To compress or to breath-hold? A systematic review of the impact of motion mitigation techniques on motion, interfraction set-up errors, and intrafraction errors in patients with hepatobiliary and pancreatic malignancies.
Radiotherapy and Oncology
, Article 110581. 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110581.
(In press).
Preview |
Text
Webster_1-s2.0-S016781402403559X-main.pdf Download (799kB) | Preview |
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Reducing motion is vital in treating hepatobiliary (HPB) and pancreatic malignancies. Abdominal compression (AC) and breath-hold (BH) techniques aim to minimise respiratory motion, yet their adoption remains limited, and practices vary. This review examines the impact of AC and BH on motion, set-up errors, and patient tolerability in HPB and pancreatic patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This systematic review, conducted using PRISMA and PICOS criteria, includes publications from January 2015 to February 2023. Eligible studies focused on AC and BH interventions in adults with HPB and pancreatic malignancies. Endpoints examined motion, set-up errors, intra-fraction errors, and patient tolerability. Due to study heterogeneity, Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis was used, and a 5 mm threshold assessed the impact of motion mitigation. RESULTS: In forty studies, 14 explored AC and 26 BH, with 20 on HPB, 13 on pancreatic, and 7 on mixed cohorts. Six studied pre-treatment, 22 inter/intra-fraction errors, and 12 both. Six AC pre-treatment studies showed > 5 mm motion, and 4 BH and 2 AC studies reported > 5 mm inter-fraction errors. Compression studies commonly investigated the arch and belt, and DIBH was the predominant BH technique. No studies compared AC and BH. There was variation in the techniques, and several studies did not follow standardised error reporting. Patient experience and tolerability were under-reported. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that AC effectively reduces motion, but its effectiveness may vary. BH can immobilise motion; however, it can be inconsistent between fractions. The review underscores the need for larger, standardised studies and emphasizes the importance of considering the patient's perspective for tailored treatments.
| Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Title: | To compress or to breath-hold? A systematic review of the impact of motion mitigation techniques on motion, interfraction set-up errors, and intrafraction errors in patients with hepatobiliary and pancreatic malignancies |
| Location: | Ireland |
| Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110581 |
| Publisher version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2024.110581 |
| Language: | English |
| Additional information: | This version is the author accepted manuscript. For information on re-use, please refer to the publisher’s terms and conditions. Under a Creative Commons license https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
| Keywords: | Hepatobiliary malignancies, Motion management, Motion mitigation, Pancreatic malignancies, Systematic review |
| UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > UCL BEAMS > Faculty of Engineering Science > Dept of Med Phys and Biomedical Eng |
| URI: | https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10198706 |
Archive Staff Only
 |
View Item |
