Jong Min Park1, So-Yeon Park2, Hong-Gyun Wu3, Jung-In Kim4. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Robotics Research Laboratory for Extreme Environments, Advanced Institutes of Convergence Technology, Suwon, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Institute of Radiation Medicine, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea; Biomedical Research Institute, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea. Electronic address: madangin@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the changes in quality of the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans with couch-shift between arcs by half of a multi-leaf collimator (MLC) leaf width. METHODS: A total of 22 patients with head-and-neck cancer were retrospectively selected. Since the smallest MLC leaf width was 5 mm in this study, the couch was shifted by 2.5 mm in the longitudinal-direction between arcs to increase the resolution of fluence map. A total of three types of VMAT plans were generated for each patient; the three types of plans were a two-full-arc plan without couch-shift (NS plan), a two-half-arc-pair plan with couch-shift (HAS plan), and a two-full-arc pair plan with couch-shift (FAS plan). Changes in the dose-volumetric parameters were investigated. RESULTS: The FAS plan showed the best plan quality for the target volumes and organs at risk compared to the NS and HAS plans. However, the magnitudes of differences among the three types of plans were minimal, and every plan was clinically acceptable. The average integral doses of the NS, HAS, and FAS plans were 160,549 ± 37,600 Gy-cc, 147,828 ± 33,343 Gy-cc, and 156,030 ± 36,263 Gy-cc, respectively. The average monitor unit of the NS, HAS, and FAS plans were 717 ± 120 MU, 648 ± 100 MU, and 763 ± 158 MU, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The HAS plan was better than the others in terms of normal tissue sparing and plan efficiency. By shifting the couch by half of the MLC leaf width in the longitudinal direction between arcs, the VMAT plan quality could be improved.
PURPOSE: To investigate the changes in quality of the volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans with couch-shift between arcs by half of a multi-leaf collimator (MLC) leaf width. METHODS: A total of 22 patients with head-and-neck cancer were retrospectively selected. Since the smallest MLC leaf width was 5 mm in this study, the couch was shifted by 2.5 mm in the longitudinal-direction between arcs to increase the resolution of fluence map. A total of three types of VMAT plans were generated for each patient; the three types of plans were a two-full-arc plan without couch-shift (NS plan), a two-half-arc-pair plan with couch-shift (HAS plan), and a two-full-arc pair plan with couch-shift (FAS plan). Changes in the dose-volumetric parameters were investigated. RESULTS: The FAS plan showed the best plan quality for the target volumes and organs at risk compared to the NS and HAS plans. However, the magnitudes of differences among the three types of plans were minimal, and every plan was clinically acceptable. The average integral doses of the NS, HAS, and FAS plans were 160,549 ± 37,600 Gy-cc, 147,828 ± 33,343 Gy-cc, and 156,030 ± 36,263 Gy-cc, respectively. The average monitor unit of the NS, HAS, and FAS plans were 717 ± 120 MU, 648 ± 100 MU, and 763 ± 158 MU, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The HAS plan was better than the others in terms of normal tissue sparing and plan efficiency. By shifting the couch by half of the MLC leaf width in the longitudinal direction between arcs, the VMAT plan quality could be improved.
Authors: Linda Rossi; Alejandra Méndez Romero; Maaike Milder; Erik de Klerck; Sebastiaan Breedveld; Ben Heijmen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-02-06 Impact factor: 3.240