Literature DB >> 12361213

Minimizing delivery time and monitor units in static IMRT by leaf-sequencing.

S M Crooks1, L F McAven, D F Robinson, L Xing.   

Abstract

Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) requires the determination of the appropriate multileaf collimator settings to deliver an intensity map. The purpose of this work was to attempt to reduce the number of segments required for IMRT delivery and the number of monitor units required to deliver an intensity map. An intensity map may be written as a matrix. Leaf sequencing was formulated as a problem of decomposing the matrix into a series of sub-matrices. Sets of random intensity matrices were created and the segmentations produced by applying different algorithms were compared. The number of segments, important if verification and record (VR) overhead is significant, and beam on times were examined. It is shown that reducing the value of the matrix entries by the maximum amount at each stage results in the smallest number of steps. Reducing the 2-norm (sum of the squares) of the matrix entries by the maximum amount at each step results in the smallest beam on time. Three new algorithms are introduced, two of which produce results that are superior to those generated by the algorithms of other researchers. The resulting methods can be expanded upon to include tongue and groove effects and leaf inter-digitization. With square random matrices of the order 15, the reduction in beam time and segmentation is up to 30-40%. Compared to previous algorithms, those presented here have demonstrated a reduction in the beam on time required to deliver an intensity map by 30-40%. Similarly, the number of segments needed to deliver an intensity map is also reduced.

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12361213     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/47/17/305

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  7 in total

1.  Trimmer sequencing time minimization during dynamically collimated proton therapy using a colony of cooperating agents.

Authors:  Blake R Smith; Daniel E Hyer; Ryan T Flynn; Patrick M Hill; Wesley S Culberson
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2019-10-21       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Use of plan quality degradation to evaluate tradeoffs in delivery efficiency and clinical plan metrics arising from IMRT optimizer and sequencer compromises.

Authors:  Joel R Wilkie; Martha M Matuszak; Mary Feng; Jean M Moran; Benedick A Fraass
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Radiotherapy and risks of tumor regrowth or inducing second cancer.

Authors:  Emad Y Moawad
Journal:  Cancer Nanotechnol       Date:  2011-08-18

4.  A comparison of three commercial IMRT treatment planning systems for selected paediatric cases.

Authors:  Ismail Eldesoky; Ehab M Attalla; Wael M Elshemey; Mohamed S Zaghloul
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2012-03-08       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Planning quality and delivery efficiency of sMLC delivered IMRT treatment of oropharyngeal cancers evaluated by RTOG H-0022 dosimetric criteria.

Authors:  X Ronald Zhu; Christopher J Schultz; Michael T Gillin
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2004-10-01       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  What is an acceptably smoothed fluence? Dosimetric and delivery considerations for dynamic sliding window IMRT.

Authors:  Nicolini Giorgia; Fogliata Antonella; Vanetti Eugenio; Clivio Alessandro; Ammazzalorso Filippo; Cozzi Luca
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2007-11-23       Impact factor: 3.481

7.  Comparison of the KonRad IMRT and XiO treatment planning systems.

Authors:  Bodo Reitz; Moyed Miften
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2008-07-14       Impact factor: 2.102

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.