Dosimetric comparison of coplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy, noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and volumetric arc therapy planning technique in hippocampal-sparing whole-brain radiotherapy

Ajay Sharma, P. Bagdare, P. Chadha, P. Shree, M. Gupta, R. Chauhan, I. Jaiswal, K. Talapatra
{"title":"Dosimetric comparison of coplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy, noncoplanar intensity-modulated radiotherapy, and volumetric arc therapy planning technique in hippocampal-sparing whole-brain radiotherapy","authors":"Ajay Sharma, P. Bagdare, P. Chadha, P. Shree, M. Gupta, R. Chauhan, I. Jaiswal, K. Talapatra","doi":"10.4103/rpe.rpe_48_20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this study was to compare the dosimetric parameters of Co-planar Intensity modulated radiotherapy (C-IMRT), non-coplanar (NC-IMRT), and volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) planning technique in hippocampal sparing (HS) whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT). Fifteen patients of brain metastasis (BM) treated with hippocampal sparing whole-brain palliative radiation were selected for this study. C-IMRT, NC-IMRT and VMAT plans were generated for the comparison. Generated plans were evaluated based on planning target volume (PTV) coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), beam-on time (BOT) and dose delivered to organs at risk (OARs) for the prescribed dose (PD) of 30 Gy in 10 fractions. Statistically significant difference was found in PTVD95%, PTVmax, HI, BOT, MU, Dmax of the brainstem, Dmean of eyes, Dmax of lenses and Dmax, Dmean and D2% of the bilateral hippocampus. However, a non-significant difference was observed in CI, D100% of both the hippocampus, Dmax of the optic chiasm, optic nerves, and Dmax of eyes in all the three planning techniques. Considering the superior plan quality, both NC-IMRT and VMAT are better than the C-IMRT planning technique. Based on beam-on time and delivery efficiency VMAT is found to be superior to both the C-IMRT and NC-IMRT technique. Doses to OARs are very well within the limits in all the three planning techniques.","PeriodicalId":32488,"journal":{"name":"Radiation Protection and Environment","volume":"44 1","pages":"22 - 27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Radiation Protection and Environment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/rpe.rpe_48_20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the dosimetric parameters of Co-planar Intensity modulated radiotherapy (C-IMRT), non-coplanar (NC-IMRT), and volumetric arc therapy (VMAT) planning technique in hippocampal sparing (HS) whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT). Fifteen patients of brain metastasis (BM) treated with hippocampal sparing whole-brain palliative radiation were selected for this study. C-IMRT, NC-IMRT and VMAT plans were generated for the comparison. Generated plans were evaluated based on planning target volume (PTV) coverage, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), beam-on time (BOT) and dose delivered to organs at risk (OARs) for the prescribed dose (PD) of 30 Gy in 10 fractions. Statistically significant difference was found in PTVD95%, PTVmax, HI, BOT, MU, Dmax of the brainstem, Dmean of eyes, Dmax of lenses and Dmax, Dmean and D2% of the bilateral hippocampus. However, a non-significant difference was observed in CI, D100% of both the hippocampus, Dmax of the optic chiasm, optic nerves, and Dmax of eyes in all the three planning techniques. Considering the superior plan quality, both NC-IMRT and VMAT are better than the C-IMRT planning technique. Based on beam-on time and delivery efficiency VMAT is found to be superior to both the C-IMRT and NC-IMRT technique. Doses to OARs are very well within the limits in all the three planning techniques.
共面调强放疗、非平面调强放疗和体积弧治疗计划技术在保留海马全脑放疗中的剂量比较
本研究的目的是比较共平面调强放射治疗(C-IMRT)、非共面放射治疗(NC-IMRT)和体积电弧治疗(VMAT)计划技术在保留海马(HS)全脑放射治疗(WBRT)中的剂量参数。本研究选择了15例脑转移瘤(BM)患者接受保留海马的全脑姑息性放射治疗。生成C-IMRT、NC-IMRT和VMAT计划进行比较。根据计划目标体积(PTV)覆盖率、一致性指数(CI)、均匀性指数(HI)、射束开启时间(BOT)和输送给风险器官的剂量(OAR),对生成的计划进行评估,规定剂量(PD)为30 Gy,分为10个部分。脑干的PTVD95%、PTVmax、HI、BOT、MU、Dmax、眼睛的Dmean、晶状体的Dmax和双侧海马的Dmax、Dmean和D2%差异有统计学意义。然而,在所有三种计划技术中,CI、海马D100%、视交叉Dmax、视神经和眼睛Dmax均无显著差异。考虑到优越的计划质量,NC-IMRT和VMAT都优于C-IMRT计划技术。基于波束开启时间和传输效率,VMAT被发现优于C-IMRT和NC-IMRT技术。OAR的剂量在所有三种规划技术的限制范围内都很好。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信