Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Swiss Federal Institute of Technology | OTHER |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Since 1996 proton therapy has been applied very successfully at the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland to irradiate deep-seated, stationary tumors. In order to treat tumors within an organ which moves due to breathing (e.g. lung) motion mitigation strategies need to be implemented to ensure the precise irradiation of the moving target. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and compare (via MRI imaging) 2 techniques which "freeze" the movement of the lung by breath hold. One method is suppression of respiratory movement via high-frequency, mechanical ventilation by means of a Jet Ventilator (HFPV). The other technique is deep Inspiration breath-hold (DIBH) with Hyperventilation and simultaneous Inspiration of 100% O2 including daily breath-hold exercise.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Deep Inspiration Breath Hold (DIBH) | Experimental | DIBH extended by prior hyperventilation while breathing 100% O2 |
|
| High Frequency Percussive Ventilation (HFPV) | Active Comparator | passive Ventilation by a jet ventilator |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deep Inspiration Breath Hold (DIBH) | Other | human-based DIBH method with short-term breath-hold training |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Difference in MRI Images | pulmonary anatomical structure points are evaluated by means of MRI scans. The difference of these MRI evaluations between the DIBH- and HFPV-technique is the primary outcome measure. | 3 weeks |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Difference in breath-hold duration | The difference between the DIBH- and HFPV-technique in breath-hold Duration is the secondary outcome measure | 3 weeks |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Frank Emert, PhD | Paul Scherrer Institut, Center for Proton Therapy | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Paul Scherrer Institut, Center for Proton Therapy | Villigen | Canton of Aargau | 5232 | Switzerland |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 33996545 | Background | Emert F, Missimer J, Eichenberger PA, Walser M, Gmur C, Lomax AJ, Weber DC, Spengler CM. Enhanced Deep-Inspiration Breath Hold Superior to High-Frequency Percussive Ventilation for Respiratory Motion Mitigation: A Physiology-Driven, MRI-Guided Assessment Toward Optimized Lung Cancer Treatment With Proton Therapy. Front Oncol. 2021 Apr 29;11:621350. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.621350. eCollection 2021. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
All study participants will perform both techniques of suppression of respiratory motion at 4 weekly visits. They always start with the deep-inspiration-breath- hold (DIBH) technique, extended by prior hyperventilation while breathing 100% O2, followed by the high-frequency-percussive-ventilation (HFPV) technique. Inbetween the weekly visits, participants are requested to perform a daily, short breath-hold training at home.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| High Frequency Percussive Ventilation (HFPV) | Other | device-based HFPV technique |
|