We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To evaluate the efficacy of a Belly Board immobilisation device for rectal cancer patients.
Materials and methods
A randomised trial in patients receiving neo-adjuvant chemoradiation for rectal carcinoma was established. Patients were treated, prone with control arm, according to standard departmental protocol and experimental arm with the use of a Belly Board. All treatments were planned using a three-field technique. The primary endpoints were reproducibility and irradiated small bowel volume. Questionnaires were used to assess secondary endpoints of patient comfort, ease of set-up and acute toxicities.
Results
Pre-planned interim analysis was performed after recruiting 30 patients. In all, 348 portal images were analysed retrospectively. Around 8 out of 12 parameters measuring set-up reproducibility were in favour of the Belly Board arm. Random error in the anterior–posterior direction was improved and statistically significant in the experimental arm (95% CI; p≤0·05). Small bowel V15 was significantly lower in the Belly Board position (mean V15=14·5%) compared with the standard position (mean V15=21·4%), paired t-test 95% CI; p=0·035. Also, patients’ comfort satisfaction was greater in the Belly Board arm.
Conclusions
Set-up reproducibility, small bowel V15, patient comfort and satisfaction were all significantly improved by the use of the Belly Board.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.