Literature DB >> 10613329

A dosimetric comparison of fan-beam intensity modulated radiotherapy with Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery for treating intermediate intracranial lesions.

L Ma1, P Xia, L J Verhey, A L Boyer.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare and evaluate treatment plans for the fan-beam intensity modulated radiotherapy and the Gamma Knife radiosurgery for treating medium-size intracranial lesions (range 4-25 cm3). METHODS AND MATERIALS: Treatment plans were developed for the Leksell Gamma Knife and a fan-beam inverse treatment planning system for intensity modulated radiotherapy. Treatment plan comparisons were carried out using dose-volume histogram (DVH), tissue-volume ratio (TVR), and maximum dose to the prescription dose (MDPD) ratio. The study was carried out for both simulated targets and clinical targets with irregular shapes and at different locations.
RESULTS: The MDPD ratio was significantly greater for the Gamma Knife plans than for the fan-beam IMRT plans. The Gamma Knife plans produced equivalent TVR values to the fan-beam IMRT plans. Based on the DVH comparison, the fan-beam IMRT delivered significantly more dose to the normal brain tissue than the Gamma Knife. The results of the comparison were found to be insensitive to the target locations.
CONCLUSION: The Gamma Knife is better than the fan-beam IMRT in sparing normal brain tissue while producing equivalent tumor dose conformity for treating medium-size intracranial lesions. However, the target dose homogeneity is significantly better for the fan-beam IMRT than for the Gamma Knife.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10613329     DOI: 10.1016/s0360-3016(99)00340-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  8 in total

1.  The relation between various conformity indices and the influence of the target coverage difference in prescription isodose surface on these values in intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery.

Authors:  K Ohtakara; S Hayashi; H Hoshi
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-09-21       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Aperture effect for LINAC-based SRS in small target treatment†.

Authors:  Kaile Li
Journal:  J Radiosurg SBRT       Date:  2016

3.  A phase II multi-institutional study assessing simultaneous in-field boost helical tomotherapy for 1-3 brain metastases.

Authors:  George Rodrigues; Slav Yartsev; Keng Yeow Tay; Gregory R Pond; Frank Lagerwaard; Glenn Bauman
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 3.481

4.  Simulational study of a dosimetric comparison between a Gamma Knife treatment plan and an intensity-modulated radiotherapy plan for skull base tumors.

Authors:  Hisato Nakazawa; Yoshimasa Mori; Masataka Komori; Takahiko Tsugawa; Yuta Shibamoto; Tatsuya Kobayashi; Chisa Hashizume; Yukio Uchiyama; Masahiro Hagiwara
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2013-12-17       Impact factor: 2.724

5.  Dosimetric performance of the new high-definition multileaf collimator for intracranial stereotactic radiosurgery.

Authors:  Anees Dhabaan; Eric Elder; Eduard Schreibmann; Ian Crocker; Walter J Curran; Nelson M Oyesiku; Hui-Kuo Shu; Tim Fox
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2010-06-21       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Dosimetric Comparison, Treatment Efficiency Estimation, and Biological Evaluation of Popular Stereotactic Radiosurgery Options in Treating Single Small Brain Metastasis.

Authors:  Yanhua Duan; Hongbin Cao; Boheng Wu; Yinghui Wu; Dong Liu; Lijun Zhou; Aihui Feng; Hao Wang; Hua Chen; Hengle Gu; Yan Shao; Ying Huang; Yang Lin; Kui Ma; Xiaolong Fu; Hong Fu; Qing Kong; Zhiyong Xu
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-08-05       Impact factor: 6.244

7.  Quality of coverage: conformity measures for stereotactic radiosurgery.

Authors:  Q-R Jackie Wu; B W Wessels; D B Einstein; R J Maciunas; E Y Kim; T J Kinsella
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Quality assurance devices for dynamic conformal radiotherapy.

Authors:  Victy Y M Wong
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2004-01-01       Impact factor: 2.102

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.