Saxsons Group

Medical Physicist's Notes · TruPose™

Three rotations the bore-class couch can't make — and what omitting them costs.

Halcyon, Ethos and Radixact ship with translation-only or single-rotation couches. The SGRT camera reports the residual pitch / roll / yaw delta in degrees, in real time — but without a robotic couch you can read the delta and not act on it. The peer-reviewed dose-coverage cost of that gap is up to 5 % PTV loss (Dhabaan 2012); TruPose closes it with three colour-coded knobs at the base of the neck.

The workflow — four steps from CBCT to beam-on

Where TruPose plugs into the existing setup chain on a bore-class linac. The SGRT delta is the trigger; the three knobs are the actuator; the couch translations are unchanged.

01

CBCT alignment

Standard kV-CBCT registration to the planning CT — translations and (where the couch supports it) the single rotation are applied automatically. This is the 3DoF / 4DoF starting point on Halcyon, Ethos and Radixact.

TruPose

TruPose is on the couch; no action yet.

02

SGRT surface match

SGRT camera locks onto the patient surface and reports residual pitch / roll / yaw deltas in degrees. On a bore-class linac without a robotic couch, these deltas are visible but un-actionable by the couch alone.

TruPose

TruPose is on the couch; deltas displayed.

03

TruPose rotational zero

Therapist reads the SGRT delta on the monitor, turns the matching colour-coded knob (pitch / roll / yaw) until the SGRT reads zero. ±4.0° on each axis — more than four times the published worst-case residual yaw (~1°, Dhabaan 2012).

TruPose

Three knobs turned; SGRT delta zeroed.

04

SGRT confirm + beam-on

SGRT confirms the surface match held during the knob adjustments. Intra-fraction motion is monitored continuously by the SGRT loop; the published correction-active envelope (Liu 2015) is 98.5 % of fraction time inside 0.4 mm / 0.2°.

TruPose

Locked. Beam-on.

SGRT-rotational-delta workflow framework: AAPM TG-147 (Willoughby 2012); 4DoF-vs-6DoF dose comparison: Dhabaan A et al., J Appl Clin Med Phys 13(6):3850 (2012).

What the published evidence says — verbatim

Four findings from the peer-reviewed 6DoF positioning literature. None of them name TruPose — together they describe the residual-error envelope and dosimetric cost that a bore-class 6DoF setup has to clear.

  • Dhabaan 2012 — 4DoF-only PTV-coverage loss

    PMC5718543

    When pitch and roll corrections were omitted (4DoF only), PTV-coverage loss reached 5 % depending on target geometry. 28 patients / 38 targets / 63 fractions of frameless cranial SRS.

  • Dhabaan 2012 — residual rotational error after 6DoF

    PMC5718543

    Mean residual rotational error after 6DoF correction was < 0.3° on any axis; max observed yaw residual was ~1°. Max translational residual was 1.2 mm in the longitudinal direction.

  • Liu 2015 — time within tolerance, corrected vs uncorrected

    PMC4433479

    With rotational correction active, treatment time within 0.4 mm / 0.2° was 98.5 % across 20 experiments in 7 volunteers. Without correction, the same tolerance was only held for 10.7 % of treatment time.

  • Wilbert 2010 — first clinical 6DoF positioning

    PMC2890022

    Semi-robotic 6DoF positioning achieved 1.6 ± 0.8 mm clinical inter-fraction repositioning (3D vector, 7 patients) and 0.6 ± 0.4 mm intra-fraction rigidity — the first published bore-class 6DoF envelope.

±4.0° per axis — over four times the published worst-case residual.

Dhabaan 2012 measured the maximum residual yaw rotation at ~1° after 6DoF correction across 63 fractions. TruPose's per-axis range gives the therapist room to clear the worst case without re-imaging.

Source: Dhabaan A et al., J Appl Clin Med Phys 13(6):3850 (2012). PMC5718543.

Scope of this page

TruPose is not named in Dhabaan 2012, Wilbert 2010, Liu 2015 or TG-147. Those papers and the practice guideline define the bore-class 6DoF positioning envelope that any rotational-correction device must serve, and we cite that envelope. Treat this page as a fit-to-evidence argument for a manual rotational adjuster, not a head-to-head device comparison.

Sources cited on this page

  • Dhabaan A, Schreibmann E, Siddiqi A, et al. Six degrees of freedom CBCT-based positioning for intracranial targets treated with frameless stereotactic radiosurgery. J Appl Clin Med Phys 13(6):3850 (2012). PMC5718543. PMC ↗
  • Wilbert J, Meyer J, Baier K, et al. Semi-robotic 6 degree of freedom positioning for intracranial high precision radiotherapy. Radiat Oncol 5:42 (2010). PMC2890022. PMC ↗
  • Liu X, Belcher AH, Grelewicz Z, Wiersma RD. Robotic real-time translational and rotational head motion correction during frameless stereotactic radiosurgery. Med Phys 42(6):2755–2762 (2015). PMC4433479. PMC ↗
  • Willoughby T, Lehmann J, Bencomo JA, et al. AAPM TG-147 — Quality assurance for non-radiographic radiotherapy localization and positioning systems. Med Phys 39(4):1728–1747 (2012). AAPM ↗