Dosimetric evaluation of four‐dimensional dose distributions of CyberKnife and volumetric‐modulated arc radiotherapy in stereotactic body lung radiotherapy
| Autor: | Eric W C Tam, Sherry C.Y. Ng, Venus W Y Lee, Mark K.H. Chan, Anthony S. M. Tong, G Law, Dora L.W. Kwong |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2013 |
| Předmět: |
Organs at Risk
medicine.medical_specialty Lung Neoplasms Dose calculation medicine.medical_treatment Normal tissue CyberKnife Dose distribution 4D dose calculation Radiosurgery Cyberknife Computer Systems Carcinoma Non-Small-Cell Lung Medicine Radiation Oncology Physics Humans Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging Four-Dimensional Computed Tomography Instrumentation volumetric‐modulated arc radiotherapy Radiation Lung SBRT business.industry Radiotherapy Planning Computer-Assisted Radiation therapy medicine.anatomical_structure Delivery efficiency Radiology Radiotherapy Intensity-Modulated business Nuclear medicine |
| Zdroj: | Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics |
| ISSN: | 1526-9914 |
| Popis: | Advanced image‐guided stereotatic body lung radiotherapy techniques using volumetric‐modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) with four‐dimensional cone‐beam computed tomography (4D CBCT) and CyberKnife with real‐time target tracking have been clinically implemented by different authors. However, dosimetric comparisons between these techniques are lacking. In this study, 4D CT scans of 14 patients were used to create VMAT and CyberKnife treatment plans using 4D dose calculations. The GTV and the organs at risk (OARs) were defined on the end‐exhale images for CyberKnife planning and were then deformed to the midventilation images (MidV) for VMAT optimization. Direct 4D Monte Carlo dose optimizations were performed for CyberKnife (4DCK). Four‐dimensional dose calculations were also applied to VMAT plans to generate the 4D dose distributions (4DVMAT) on the exhale images for direct comparisons with the 4DCK plans. 4DCK and 4DVMAT showed comparable target conformity (1.31±0.13 vs. 1.39±0.24,p=0.05). GTV mean doses were significantly higher with 4DCK. Statistical differences of dose volume metrics were not observed in the majority of OARs studied, except for esophagus, with 4DVMAT yielding marginally higher D1% than 4DCK. The normal tissue volumes receiving 80%, 50%, and 30% of the prescription dose (V80%,V50%, and V30%) were higher with 4DVMAT, whereas 4DCK yielded slightly higher V10% in posterior lesions than 4DVMAT. VMAT resulted in much less monitor units and therefore greater delivery efficiency than CyberKnife. In general, it was possible to produce dosimetrically acceptable plans with both techniques. The selection of treatment modality should consider the dosimetric results as well as the patient's tolerance of the treatment process specific to the SBRT technique. PACS numbers: 87.53.Ly, 87.55.km |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
Plný text