Asymmetric Patient Support Mounting for Radiation Therapy

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The high cost and labor-intensive installation of precision-manufactured rails for patient supporting devices in radiation therapy, combined with the need for precise alignment, lead to increased equipment and installation costs, while existing systems often require full rotational travel ranges that are not efficiently utilized.

Innovation Solution

A patient supporting device with a fix-mounted base and asymmetric mounting geometry, allowing for limited rotational travel range, which reduces manufacturing and installation costs while maintaining effective treatment capabilities by utilizing a positioner and controller to position the platform at various angles relative to the treatment machine.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If rails are used to support patient supporting devices for full rotational travel, then treatment range and positioning flexibility are improved, but manufacturing cost and installation cost increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetreatment rangeVSAvoidmanufacturing cost
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The patient supporting device is mounted asymmetrically with respect to the treatment machine, creating an asymmetric mounting geometry where the device is offset from the central axis. This asymmetric configuration allows the platform to achieve sufficient treatment coverage for most treatment cases without requiring expensive precision rails, as the asymmetric position naturally limits rotational travel to one side while maintaining clinical effectiveness.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #4Asymmetry

Solution Approach 2:

The invention extracts and eliminates the rail component from the system entirely. Instead of using rails to support and guide the patient supporting device, the device is directly fixedly mounted to the treatment room at an asymmetric position. This removal of the rail subsystem significantly reduces manufacturing and installation costs while maintaining the essential function of patient positioning.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

2Manufacturing precision

If precision rails are installed for patient supporting devices, then positioning accuracy is improved, but installation time and labor intensity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepositioning accuracyVSAvoidinstallation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The rail system is completely removed from the installation process. The patient supporting device is directly fixedly mounted to the treatment room structure at a predetermined asymmetric location, eliminating the time-consuming rail installation process while maintaining sufficient positioning accuracy for clinical treatment through the asymmetric mounting geometry.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

3Adaptability or versatility

If full rotational travel range is provided for patient supporting device, then treatment coverage is improved, but equipment cost and installation complexity increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetreatment coverageVSAvoidmounting geometry complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The mounting geometry is deliberately designed to be asymmetric rather than symmetric. The patient supporting device is offset from the central axis of the treatment machine, creating an asymmetric mounting configuration. This asymmetric geometry naturally limits the rotational travel range to one side, simplifying the mounting structure while still providing sufficient treatment coverage for most clinical cases.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #4Asymmetry

Solution Approach 2:

Instead of providing full rotational travel capability in all directions, the system uses partial action by limiting rotation to one side only. The asymmetric mounting allows the platform to rotate sufficiently to cover most treatment areas (from skull to pelvis) without requiring complete 360-degree or bidirectional rotation, thereby reducing mounting complexity while maintaining adequate treatment coverage.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

4Ease of manufacture

If asymmetric mounting geometry is used to reduce cost, then manufacturing and installation cost decrease, but rotational travel range is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveinstallation costVSAvoidrotational travel range
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSLength of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The asymmetric mounting geometry is the core solution that simultaneously achieves cost reduction and sufficient treatment capability. By mounting the patient supporting device at an offset position rather than centrally, the system accepts limited rotational travel to one side as a deliberate design choice that eliminates expensive precision rails and complex mounting structures while maintaining clinical effectiveness for most treatment cases.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #4Asymmetry

Data Source

PatentUS11684804B2Patient supports for medical treatments
Publication Date: 2023.06.27 SIEMENS HEALTHINEERS INTERNATIONAL AG
  • US11684804B2 patent drawing
  • US11684804B2 patent drawing
  • US11684804B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A patient supporting device includes: a base; a positioner; a platform having a first end and a second end; and a controller; wherein the positioner is operable by the controller to place the platform at one of a first plurality of possible positions or at one of a second plurality of possible positions, wherein in any of the first plurality of possible positions, the second end of the platform is closer to one of a left side and a right side of a treatment machine; wherein in any of the second plurality of possible positions, the second end of the platform is closer to another one of the left side and the right side; and wherein a size of a first spatial region defined by the first plurality of possible positions is different from a size of a second spatial region defined by the second plurality of possible positions.