背景:颗粒疗法在肿瘤疾病的治疗中做出了值得注意的贡献。为了能够从不同的角度照射,通常很贵,使用复杂的大型龙门架。而是通过机架旋转光束,病人本身可能会旋转。在这里,我们介绍了志愿者对临床磁共振(MR)扫描仪中全封闭患者旋转系统的耐受性和依从性,可用于MR引导的放射治疗。在一项前瞻性评估研究中进行。
方法:使用患者旋转系统模拟并执行磁共振成像(MRI)检查,其中50名志愿者没有肿瘤问题。对于20名参与者,通过引入逼真的MRI噪声来模拟孔内的MR检查,而30名参与者接受了图像采集检查。最初,评估了身体参数和幽闭恐惧症。然后将受试者旋转到不同角度进行模拟(0°,45°,90°,180°)和成像(0°,70°,90°,110°)。在每个角度,使用6项状态-特质-焦虑量表(STAI-6)和改良的运动疾病评估问卷(MSAQ)评估焦虑和晕车。此外,评估了不适的一般区域。
结果:在50名受试者中,3名(6%)受试者提前终止研究。一名受试者在模拟期间因旋转至45°时恶心而退出。在成像过程中,另外两名受试者因肩痛从90°和110°定位而退出,分别。幽闭恐怖症的平均结果(0=无幽闭恐怖症至4=极端幽闭恐怖症)对轻度幽闭恐怖症的平均结果(平均得分:模拟0.64±0.33,成像0.51±0.39)。平均焦虑评分(0%=无焦虑至100%=最大焦虑)为11.04%(模拟)和15.82%(成像)。在所有参与者中获得3.5%(模拟)和6.76%(成像)的平均晕动病评分(0%=无晕动病至100%=最大晕动病)。
结论:我们的研究证明了在MR扫描仪内全封闭旋转系统中水平旋转的可行性。焦虑评分较低,晕车仅是次要影响。焦虑和晕车都没有角度依赖性。关于旋转装置中的固定的进一步优化可以增加受试者的舒适度。
BACKGROUND: Particle therapy makes a noteworthy contribution in the treatment of tumor diseases. In order to be able to irradiate from different angles, usually expensive, complex and large gantries are used. Instead rotating the beam via a gantry, the patient itself might be rotated. Here we present tolerance and compliance of volunteers for a fully-enclosed patient rotation system in a clinical magnetic resonance (MR)-scanner for potential use in MR-guided radiotherapy, conducted within a prospective evaluation study.
METHODS: A patient rotation system was used to simulate and perform magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-examinations with 50 volunteers without an oncological question. For 20 participants, the MR-examination within the bore was simulated by introducing realistic MRI noise, whereas 30 participants received an examination with image acquisition. Initially, body parameters and claustrophobia were assessed. The subjects were then rotated to different angles for simulation (0°, 45°, 90°, 180°) and imaging (0°, 70°, 90°, 110°). At each angle, anxiety and motion sickness were assessed using a 6-item State-Trait-Anxiety-Inventory (STAI-6) and a modified Motion Sickness Assessment Questionnaire (MSAQ). In addition, general areas of discomfort were evaluated.
RESULTS: Out of 50 subjects, three (6%) subjects terminated the study prematurely. One subject dropped out during simulation due to nausea while rotating to 45°. During imaging, further two subjects dropped out due to shoulder pain from positioning at 90° and 110°, respectively. The average result for claustrophobia (0 = no claustrophobia to 4 = extreme claustrophobia) was none to light claustrophobia (average score: simulation 0.64 ± 0.33, imaging 0.51 ± 0.39). The mean anxiety scores (0% = no anxiety to 100% = maximal anxiety) were 11.04% (simulation) and 15.82% (imaging). Mean motion sickness scores (0% = no motion sickness to 100% = maximal motion sickness) of 3.5% (simulation) and 6.76% (imaging) were obtained across all participants.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study proves the feasibility of horizontal rotation in a fully-enclosed rotation system within an MR-scanner. Anxiety scores were low and motion sickness was only a minor influence. Both anxiety and motion sickness showed no angular dependency. Further optimizations with regard to immobilization in the rotation device may increase subject comfort.