A Dosimetric Comparison of Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy to Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy in the Treatment of Locally Advanced Rectal Carcinoma

Q3 Health Professions
E. Eldebawy, Y. Rashed, M. AlKhaldi, E. Day
{"title":"A Dosimetric Comparison of Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy to Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy in the Treatment of Locally Advanced Rectal Carcinoma","authors":"E. Eldebawy, Y. Rashed, M. AlKhaldi, E. Day","doi":"10.22038/IJMP.2019.42941.1652","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: The study was conducted to compare volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Material and Methods: Ten computed tomography (CT) scans were selected and for each CT scan, two plans were calculated (IMRT and VMAT). The average cumulative dose-volume histograms of VMAT plans for the planning target volumes (PTVs), organs at risk (OARs), and normal tissues were calculated and compared with those reported for the corresponding IMRT technique. Results: Target coverage was equivalent for both techniques. For primary PTV, the average homogeneity index (HI) of IMRT was significantly lower than the VMAT plans (0.10±0.04 vs. 0.11±0.03; p <0.0001). The average conformity index (CI) values for IMRT and VMAT were 1.21 and 1.12, respectively, with a nonsignificant trend for better results with VMAT (p =0.1). For the PTV boost, there was a nonsignificant trend for better results with VMAT in average HI and CI. The VMAT was superior to IMRT in OAR sparing. For monitor units (MUs), VMAT plans required 70% less MUs than IMRT. Conclusion: For LARC patients, VMAT was able to deliver treatment plans dosimetrically equivalent to IMRT in terms of PTV coverage. The VMAT provided better OAR sparing and significant reduction of MUs in comparison to IMRT.","PeriodicalId":14613,"journal":{"name":"Iranian Journal of Medical Physics","volume":"17 1","pages":"374-379"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Iranian Journal of Medical Physics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22038/IJMP.2019.42941.1652","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The study was conducted to compare volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). Material and Methods: Ten computed tomography (CT) scans were selected and for each CT scan, two plans were calculated (IMRT and VMAT). The average cumulative dose-volume histograms of VMAT plans for the planning target volumes (PTVs), organs at risk (OARs), and normal tissues were calculated and compared with those reported for the corresponding IMRT technique. Results: Target coverage was equivalent for both techniques. For primary PTV, the average homogeneity index (HI) of IMRT was significantly lower than the VMAT plans (0.10±0.04 vs. 0.11±0.03; p <0.0001). The average conformity index (CI) values for IMRT and VMAT were 1.21 and 1.12, respectively, with a nonsignificant trend for better results with VMAT (p =0.1). For the PTV boost, there was a nonsignificant trend for better results with VMAT in average HI and CI. The VMAT was superior to IMRT in OAR sparing. For monitor units (MUs), VMAT plans required 70% less MUs than IMRT. Conclusion: For LARC patients, VMAT was able to deliver treatment plans dosimetrically equivalent to IMRT in terms of PTV coverage. The VMAT provided better OAR sparing and significant reduction of MUs in comparison to IMRT.
体积调制电弧与强度调制放射治疗局部晚期直肠癌的剂量比较
简介:本研究对局部晚期癌症(LARC)患者进行容量调制电弧治疗(VMAT)和强度调制放射治疗(IMRT)的比较。材料和方法:选择10次计算机断层扫描,每次CT扫描计算两种方案(IMRT和VMAT)。计算VMAT计划的计划目标体积(PTV)、危险器官(OAR)和正常组织的平均累积剂量体积直方图,并将其与相应IMRT技术的报告进行比较。结果:两种技术的目标覆盖率相当。对于原发性PTV,IMRT的平均同质性指数(HI)显著低于VMAT计划(0.10±0.04 vs.0.11±0.03;p<0.0001)。IMRT和VMAT的平均一致性指数(CI)值分别为1.21和1.12,VMAT的效果较好的趋势不显著(p=0.1),VMAT在平均HI和CI方面有更好结果的无显著趋势。VMAT在OAR保留方面优于IMRT。对于监测单元(MU),VMAT计划所需的MU比IMRT少70%。结论:对于LARC患者,VMAT能够在PTV覆盖率方面提供与IMRT剂量相当的治疗计划。与IMRT相比,VMAT提供了更好的OAR保留和MU的显著减少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
Iranian Journal of Medical Physics Health Professions-Radiological and Ultrasound Technology
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Iranian Journal of Medical Physics (IJMP) is the official scientific bimonthly publication of the Iranian Association of Medical Physicists. IJMP is an international and multidisciplinary journal, peer review, free of charge publication and open access. This journal devoted to publish Original Papers, Review Articles, Short Communications, Technical Notes, Editorial and Letters to the Editor in the field of “Medical Physics” involving both basic and clinical research. Submissions of manuscript from all countries are welcome and will be reviewed by at least two expert reviewers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信