Literature DB >> 15878109

IMRT with the sliding window: comparison of the static and dynamic methods. Dosimetric and spectral analysis.

Giorgia Nicolini1, Antonella Fogliata, Luca Cozzi.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Aim of the study is the critical appraisal of the two delivery techniques for intensity-modulated treatments commonly known as dynamic and static step and shoot, in the framework of a sliding window multileaf sequencing method.
METHODS: The study was performed using the solution commercialised by Varian with the Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS) and the Clinac accelerator. For a set of intensity modulated fluences, the calculated dose maps and the dose delivered to films were compared for the static and dynamic modes to verify the capability of the TPS to accurately model both the delivery modes. For these investigations, the gamma concept of Low et al. [Low D, Harms W, Mutic S, Purdy J. A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions. Med Phys 1998;25: 656-60] was applied demonstrating, in general, optimal modeling for both static and dynamic tests. Optimal and actual fluences, were analysed to ascertain the degree of the TPS accuracy in converting 'ideal' maps into realistic leaf motions.
RESULTS: Among the methods used, the Webb's Modulation Index [Webb S. Use of a quantitative index of beam modulation to characterize dose conformality: illustration by a comparison of full beamlet IMRT, few-segment IMRT and conformal unmodulated radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol. 2003;48: 2051-2062] proved to be useful. Also, dose volume histogram analysis was applied on deliverable plans using more clinical tools.
CONCLUSION: The dynamic delivery method seems to offer a more reliable agreement with the optimal calculations and, clinically, a slightly superior performance in terms of target coverage.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15878109     DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2005.03.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  13 in total

1.  To evaluate the accuracy of dynamic versus static IMRT delivery using portal dosimetry.

Authors:  S Clemente; R Caivano; M Cozzolino; G Califano; C Chiumento; A Fiorentino; V Fusco
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2013-06-21       Impact factor: 3.405

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.  Low rate of thoracic toxicity in palliative paraspinal single-fraction stereotactic body radiation therapy.

Authors:  Daniel R Gomez; Margie A Hunt; Andrew Jackson; William P O'Meara; Elena N Bukanova; Michael J Zelefsky; Yoshiya Yamada; Kenneth E Rosenzweig
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2009-11-16       Impact factor: 6.280

4.  Dosimetric effect of multileaf collimator leaf width in intensity-modulated radiotherapy delivery techniques for small- and large-volume targets.

Authors:  S A Yoganathan; Karthick Raj Mani; K J Maria Das; Arpita Agarwal; Shaleen Kumar
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2011-04

5.  Impact of dose rate on accuracy of intensity modulated radiation therapy plan delivery using the pretreatment portal dosimetry quality assurance and setting up the workflow at hospital levels.

Authors:  Karunakaran Kaviarasu; N Arunai Nambi Raj; K Krishna Murthy; A Ananda Giri Babu; Bhaskar Laxman Durga Prasad
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2015 Oct-Dec

Review 6.  Direct aperture optimization as a means of reducing the complexity of Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy plans.

Authors:  Maria Broderick; Michelle Leech; Mary Coffey
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2009-02-16       Impact factor: 3.481

7.  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

8.  Feasibility of using the Vero SBRT system for intracranial SRS.

Authors:  Manuela Burghelea; Dirk Verellen; Thierry Gevaert; Tom Depuydt; Kenneth Poels; Viorica Simon; Mark De Ridder
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-01-06       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  SWIMRT: a graphical user interface using sliding window algorithm to construct a fluence map machine file.

Authors:  James C L Chow; Grigor N Grigorov; Nuri Yazdani
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2006-05-25       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  The effect of interfraction prostate motion on IMRT plans: a dose-volume histogram analysis using a Gaussian error function model.

Authors:  James C L Chow; Runqing Jiang; Daniel Markel
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2009-09-30       Impact factor: 2.102

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.