Table 1 Comparing prostate intrafraction motion magnitude. Prostate intrafraction motion results from multiple institutional trials using an endorectal balloon (ERB) for immobilization compared to the current study using an EIS. Patients treated with the EIS showed significantly reduced 3D intrafraction motion for treatment times longer than 6 min. EM = Electromagnetic
Study | Sample size (n) | Technique | Immobilization | Motion Evaluation | 3D intrafraction motion | Treatment time (min) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Current study | 20 | VMAT | EIS | Pre-post CBCT | 0 % > 3 mm | >6 |
Chiang et al. 2014 [36] | 30 | VMAT | ERB | Pre-post CBCT | 3.7 % > 4.5 mm | >6 |
Smeenk et al. 2012 [15] | 30 | IMRT | ERB | Real-time EM tracking | 7.0 % > 3 mm | <6 |
Wang et al. 2012 [34] | 30 | IMRT or VMAT | ERB | Real-time EM tracking | 5.0 % > 3 mm |  ≤6 |
Both et al. 2011 [14] | 24 | IMRT or VMAT | ERB | Real-time EM tracking | 5.2 % > 3 mm | <6  |