English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Purpose:  The Elements Spine Stereotactic Radiosurgery treatment planning system uses automated volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy that can provide a highly conformal dose distribution to targets, which can provide superior sparing of the spinal cord. This study compares the dosimetric quality of Elements plans with the clinical plans of 20 spine stereotactic radiosurgery/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SRS/SBRT) patients treated at our institution.   Methods:  Twenty spine SRS/SBRT patients who were clinically treated at our institution were replanned using the automated Elements planning workflow with prespecified templates. Elements automatically evaluates the size and shape of the target to determine if splitting the PTV into simplistic subvolumes, each treated by their own arc(s), would increase conformity and spinal cord sparing. The conformity index, gradient index, PTV  D  5% , and maximum and mean cord dose were evaluated for the Elements and clinical plans. Treatment delivery efficiency was also analyzed by comparing the total number of monitor units and the modulation factor. Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were performed on the statistics.   Results:  Elements split the PTV for 50% of cases, requiring four or six arcs. Overall, Elements plans were found to be superior to clinical plans in conformity index, gradient index, and maximum cord dose. The PTV  D  5%  and cord mean dose for the Elements plans trended higher and lower, respectively. The numbers of monitor units and modulation factor were also higher for Elements plans, although the differences were not significant.   Conclusion:  Automated Elements plans achieved superior conformity and cord dose sparing compared to clinical plans and PTV splitting successfully improved spinal cord sparing.

Evaluation of Elements Spine SRS Plan Quality for SRS and SBRT Treatment of Spine Metastases