PURPOSE: We investigated the influence of beam modulation on treatment planning by comparing four available stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) modalities: Gamma-Knife-Perfexion, Novalis-Tx Dynamic-Conformal-Arc (DCA) and Dynamic-Multileaf-Collimation-Intensity-Modulated-radiotherapy (DMLC-IMRT), and Cyberknife. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with arteriovenous malformation (n = 10) or acoustic neuromas (n = 5) were planned with different treatment modalities. Paddick conformity index (CI), dose heterogeneity (DH), gradient index (GI) and beam-on time were used as dosimetric indices. RESULTS: Gamma-Knife-Perfexion can achieve high degree of conformity (CI = 0.77 ± 0.04) with limited low-doses (GI = 2.59 ± 0.10) surrounding the inhomogeneous dose distribution (D(H) = 0.84 ± 0.05) at the cost of treatment time (68.1 min ± 27.5). Novalis-Tx-DCA improved this inhomogeneity (D(H) = 0.30 ± 0.03) and treatment time (16.8 min ± 2.2) at the cost of conformity (CI = 0.66 ± 0.04) and Novalis-TX-DMLC-IMRT improved the DCA CI (CI = 0.68 ± 0.04) and inhomogeneity (D(H) = 0.18 ± 0.05) at the cost of low-doses (GI = 3.94 ± 0.92) and treatment time (21.7 min ± 3.4) (p<0.01). Cyberknife achieved comparable conformity (CI = 0.77 ± 0.06) at the cost of low-doses (GI = 3.48 ± 0.47) surrounding the homogeneous (D(H) = 0.22 ± 0.02) dose distribution and treatment time (28.4min±8.1) (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Gamma-Knife-Perfexion will comply with all SRS constraints (high conformity while minimizing low-dose spread). Multiple focal entries (Gamma-Knife-Perfexion and Cyberknife) will achieve better conformity than High-Definition-MLC of Novalis-Tx at the cost of treatment time. Non-isocentric beams (Cyberknife) or IMRT-beams (Novalis-Tx-DMLC-IMRT) will spread more low-dose than multiple isocenters (Gamma-Knife-Perfexion) or dynamic arcs (Novalis-Tx-DCA). Inverse planning and modulated fluences (Novalis-Tx-DMLC-IMRT and CyberKnife) will deliver the most homogeneous treatment. Furthermore, Linac-based systems (Novalis and Cyberknife) can perform image verification at the time of treatment delivery.
PURPOSE: We investigated the influence of beam modulation on treatment planning by comparing four available stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) modalities: Gamma-Knife-Perfexion, Novalis-Tx Dynamic-Conformal-Arc (DCA) and Dynamic-Multileaf-Collimation-Intensity-Modulated-radiotherapy (DMLC-IMRT), and Cyberknife. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Patients with arteriovenous malformation (n = 10) or acoustic neuromas (n = 5) were planned with different treatment modalities. Paddick conformity index (CI), dose heterogeneity (DH), gradient index (GI) and beam-on time were used as dosimetric indices. RESULTS: Gamma-Knife-Perfexion can achieve high degree of conformity (CI = 0.77 ± 0.04) with limited low-doses (GI = 2.59 ± 0.10) surrounding the inhomogeneous dose distribution (D(H) = 0.84 ± 0.05) at the cost of treatment time (68.1 min ± 27.5). Novalis-Tx-DCA improved this inhomogeneity (D(H) = 0.30 ± 0.03) and treatment time (16.8 min ± 2.2) at the cost of conformity (CI = 0.66 ± 0.04) and Novalis-TX-DMLC-IMRT improved the DCA CI (CI = 0.68 ± 0.04) and inhomogeneity (D(H) = 0.18 ± 0.05) at the cost of low-doses (GI = 3.94 ± 0.92) and treatment time (21.7 min ± 3.4) (p<0.01). Cyberknife achieved comparable conformity (CI = 0.77 ± 0.06) at the cost of low-doses (GI = 3.48 ± 0.47) surrounding the homogeneous (D(H) = 0.22 ± 0.02) dose distribution and treatment time (28.4min±8.1) (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Gamma-Knife-Perfexion will comply with all SRS constraints (high conformity while minimizing low-dose spread). Multiple focal entries (Gamma-Knife-Perfexion and Cyberknife) will achieve better conformity than High-Definition-MLC of Novalis-Tx at the cost of treatment time. Non-isocentric beams (Cyberknife) or IMRT-beams (Novalis-Tx-DMLC-IMRT) will spread more low-dose than multiple isocenters (Gamma-Knife-Perfexion) or dynamic arcs (Novalis-Tx-DCA). Inverse planning and modulated fluences (Novalis-Tx-DMLC-IMRT and CyberKnife) will deliver the most homogeneous treatment. Furthermore, Linac-based systems (Novalis and Cyberknife) can perform image verification at the time of treatment delivery.
Authors: Harald Treuer; Moritz Hoevels; Klaus Luyken; Veerle Visser-Vandewalle; Jochen Wirths; Martin Kocher; Maximilian Ruge Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Hossein Mahboubi; Ronald Sahyouni; Omid Moshtaghi; Kent Tadokoro; Yaser Ghavami; Kasra Ziai; Harrison W Lin; Hamid R Djalilian Journal: Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2017-04-25 Impact factor: 3.497
Authors: Chuxiong Ding; Brian Hrycushko; Louis Whitworth; Xiang Li; Lucien Nedzi; Bradley Weprin; Ramzi Abdulrahman; Babu Welch; Steve B Jiang; Zabi Wardak; Robert D Timmerman Journal: Med Phys Date: 2017-08-12 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Harald Treuer; Moritz Hoevels; Klaus Luyken; Veerle Visser-Vandewalle; Jochen Wirths; Martin Kocher; Maximilian Ruge Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2014-11-22 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Mina G Safain; Jason P Rahal; Ami Raval; Mark J Rivard; John E Mignano; Julian K Wu; Adel M Malek Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2014-06 Impact factor: 4.654