Literature DB >> 16370431

Effect of beamlet step-size on IMRT plan quality.

Guowei Zhang1, Ziping Jiang, David Shepard, Matt Earl, Cedric Yu.   

Abstract

We have studied the degree to which beamlet step-size impacts the quality of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment plans. Treatment planning for IMRT begins with the application of a grid that divides each beam's-eye-view of the target into a number of smaller beamlets (pencil beams) of radiation. The total dose is computed as a weighted sum of the dose delivered by the individual beamlets. The width of each beamlet is set to match the width of the corresponding leaf of the multileaf collimator (MLC). The length of each beamlet (beamlet step-size) is parallel to the direction of leaf travel. The beamlet step-size represents the minimum stepping distance of the leaves of the MLC and is typically predetermined by the treatment planning system. This selection imposes an artificial constraint because the leaves of the MLC and the jaws can both move continuously. Removing the constraint can potentially improve the IMRT plan quality. In this study, the optimized results were achieved using an aperture-based inverse planning technique called direct aperture optimization (DAO). We have tested the relationship between pencil beam step-size and plan quality using the American College of Radiology's IMRT test case. For this case, a series of IMRT treatment plans were produced using beamlet step-sizes of 1, 2, 5, and 10 mm. Continuous improvements were seen with each reduction in beamlet step size. The maximum dose to the planning target volume (PTV) was reduced from 134.7% to 121.5% and the mean dose to the organ at risk (OAR) was reduced from 38.5% to 28.2% as the beamlet step-size was reduced from 10 to 1 mm. The smaller pencil beam sizes also led to steeper dose gradients at the junction between the target and the critical structure with gradients of 6.0, 7.6, 8.7, and 9.1 dose%/mm achieved for beamlet step sizes of 10, 5, 2, and 1 mm, respectively.

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16370431     DOI: 10.1118/1.2098107

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  6 in total

1.  Improving IMRT-plan quality with MLC leaf position refinement post plan optimization.

Authors:  Ying Niu; Guowei Zhang; Barry L Berman; William C Parke; Byongyong Yi; Cedric X Yu
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Stereotactic body radiosurgery for spinal metastatic disease: an evidence-based review.

Authors:  William A Hall; Liza J Stapleford; Costas G Hadjipanayis; Walter J Curran; Ian Crocker; Hui-Kuo G Shu
Journal:  Int J Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-07-10

3.  Influence of beamlet width on dynamic IMRT plan quality in nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Manya Wu; Jinhui Jin; Zhenghuan Li; Fantu Kong; Yadi He; Lijiang Liu; Wei Yang; Xiangying Xu
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2022-08-05       Impact factor: 3.061

Review 4.  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

5.  Comparison of direct machine parameter optimization versus fluence optimization with sequential sequencing in IMRT of hypopharyngeal carcinoma.

Authors:  Barbara Dobler; Fabian Pohl; Ludwig Bogner; Oliver Koelbl
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2007-09-06       Impact factor: 3.481

6.  Comparing planning time, delivery time and plan quality for IMRT, RapidArc and Tomotherapy.

Authors:  Mike Oliver; Will Ansbacher; Wayne A Beckham
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2009-10-07       Impact factor: 2.102

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.