Dosimetric Comparison of Four Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy Beam Arrangements Utilized for Hippocampal-Sparing Whole-Brain Radiation Therapy
| Autor: | Raúl Díaz, Alejandro Ferrando, Marta Manzano, Eduardo Cabello, Mario Leonor, Gustavo Pozo, Alejandro Prado, Ana Milanés |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
lcsh:Medical physics. Medical radiology. Nuclear medicine
whole-brain irradiation medicine.medical_treatment lcsh:R895-920 Biophysics volumetric-modulated arc therapy 030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Couch angle medicine Hippocampal sparing Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging Mathematics business.industry Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 0933 trial Whole brain irradiation Volumetric modulated arc therapy Radiation therapy 030220 oncology & carcinogenesis Original Article Nuclear medicine business Whole brain radiation therapy Beam (structure) Homogeneity index |
| Zdroj: | Journal of Medical Physics Journal of Medical Physics, Vol 44, Iss 1, Pp 1-8 (2019) |
| ISSN: | 0971-6203 |
| Popis: | Purpose: In the present study, the performance of four VMAT beam arrangements used for hippocampal-sparing whole-brain radiation therapy is addressed. Material and Methods: Data corresponding to 20 patients were utilized so as to generate plans for every beam configuration. A preliminary study was conducted to assess the optimal distance between optimization structures (PTVx) and hippocampi. V25, V30, D50%, D2%, D98%, homogeneity index (HI) and Paddick conformity factor (CF) were evaluated for PTV. D100% and Dmax were considered for hippocampi. All plans were required to perform at least as recommended in RTOG 0933 trial regarding organs at risk (OAR) sparing and PTV objectives. Results: Considerable hippocampi sparing alongside with a reasonably low decrease in PTV coverage was achieved using a 7 mm distance between hippocampi and PTV optimization structure. Beam setup 3 (comprised of two full arcs with 0° couch angle and two half arcs with 90° couch angle) achieved the best PTV coverage, HI and CF, while it performed the second-best sparing in hippocampi and lenses. Moreover, beam setup 3 was the second-fastest treatment, although it resulted in the highest number of delivered MU among all beam setups. Beam setup 1 (comprised of two full arcs with no couch angles) was the fastest and it delivered a significantly less amount of monitor units compared with the other beam setups evaluated. Furthermore, a higher robustness was obtained by using no couch angles. Although beam setup 1 was the least optimal considering OAR sparing, it still performed better than required in the RTOG 0933 trial. Conclusions: Overall, beam setup 3 was considered to be the best. It is worth mentioning that, apart from our results, the election of one of these beam arrangements might be dependent on the amount of patient workload at a specific institution. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|