Literature DB >> 28526192

Comparison of spinal Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) planning techniques: intensity-modulated radiation therapy, modulated arc therapy, and helical tomotherapy.

Jina Kim1, Hong Seok Jang2, Yeon Sil Kim3, Byung Ock Choi3, Young-Nam Kang4.   

Abstract

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) delivers a highly conformal, hypofractionated radiation dose to a small target with minimal radiation applied to the surrounding areas. Therefore, using the proper treatment planning techniques for SBRT is important. Intensity modulation techniques, such as static intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), modulated arc therapy (mARC), and helical tomotherapy (HT), are useful for spinal SBRT because of a rapid dose fall-off and spinal cord avoidance. This study compared the planning characteristics for hypofractionated spinal SBRT administered using 3 treatment techniques. The factors evaluated for spinal SBRT planning were dose coverage, cord avoidance, target conformity, homogeneity, and dose spillage. Target coverage was 82.74% ± 3.35%, 80.92% ± 0.81%, and 85.01% ± 7.27% for IMRT, mARC, and HT, respectively. HT was therefore a powerful technique with respect to target coverage. The spinal cord dose for HT (mean, 1763.96 cGy; standard deviation [SD], 164.48) was significantly different from those for mARC (mean, 1991.75 cGy; SD, 248.00) and IMRT (mean, 2053.24 cGy; SD, 164.48). In addition, the partial spinal cord volume at 2000 cGy for HT (mean, 0.12 cc, SD, 0.01) was significantly different from those for IMRT and mARC (0.50 ± 0.10 cc and 0.56 ± 0.25 cc, respectively). The conformity index was 1.30 ± 0.12, 1.08 ± 0.05, and 1.36 ± 0.23 for IMRT, mARC, and HT planning, respectively. mARC showed the highest conformity (p = 0.000). HT used a narrow field fan beam and exhibited remarkable improvement of target coverage and cord dose, offering an important benefit to spinal SBRT. mARC had the highest target conformity and better high- and intermediate-dose spillage than HT and IMRT did, respectively. These planning techniques have different advantages. In the case of spine SBRT, HT should be used for cord avoidance. In some cases, such as for a short treatment duration when the patient is considered to be in a poor general condition, mARC can be used.
Copyright © 2017 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Helical tomotherapy; Intensity-modulated radiation therapy; Modulated arc therapy; Spine; Stereotactic body radiotherapy

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28526192     DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2017.04.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Dosim        ISSN: 1873-4022            Impact factor:   1.482


  2 in total

1.  Treatment planning for spinal radiosurgery : A competitive multiplatform benchmark challenge.

Authors:  Christos Moustakis; Mark K H Chan; Jinkoo Kim; Joakim Nilsson; Alanah Bergman; Tewfik J Bichay; Isabel Palazon Cano; Savino Cilla; Francesco Deodato; Raffaela Doro; Jürgen Dunst; Hans Theodor Eich; Pierre Fau; Ming Fong; Uwe Haverkamp; Simon Heinze; Guido Hildebrandt; Detlef Imhoff; Erik de Klerck; Janett Köhn; Ulrike Lambrecht; Britta Loutfi-Krauss; Fatemeh Ebrahimi; Laura Masi; Alan H Mayville; Ante Mestrovic; Maaike Milder; Alessio G Morganti; Dirk Rades; Ulla Ramm; Claus Rödel; Frank-Andre Siebert; Wilhelm den Toom; Lei Wang; Stefan Wurster; Achim Schweikard; Scott G Soltys; Samuel Ryu; Oliver Blanck
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2018-05-25       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  Repetitive Painting (REPEAT) Irradiation in Stereotactic Radiotherapy Using Helical Tomotherapy.

Authors:  Y U Ohkubo; Takuya Kumazawa; Ryuta Hirai; Shin-Ei Noda
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2022 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.155

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.