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/

Zendy Plus

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

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

This study compared four different volumetric modulated arc therapy ( VMAT ) beam arrangements for the treatment of early‐stage prostate cancer examining plan quality and the impact on a radiotherapy department's resources.    Methods  Twenty prostate cases were retrospectively planned using four  VMAT  beam arrangements (1) a partial arc ( PA ), (2) one arc (1A), (3) one arc plus a partial arc (1A +  PA ) and (4) two arcs (2A). The quality of the dose distributions generated were compared by examining the overall plan quality, the homogeneity and conformity to the planning target volume ( PTV ), the number of monitor units and the dose delivered to the organs at risk. Departmental resources were considered by recording the planning time and beam delivery time.    Results  Each technique produced a plan of similar quality that was considered adequate for treatment; though some differences were noted. The 1A, 1A +  PA  and 2A plans demonstrated a better conformity to the  PTV  which correlated to improved sparing of the rectum in the 60–70 Gy range for the 1A +  PA  and 2A techniques. The time needed to generate the plans was different for each technique ranging from 13.1 min for 1A +  PA  to 17.8 min for 1A. The  PA  beam delivery time was fastest with a mean time of 0.9 min. Beam‐on times then increased with an increase in the number of arcs up to an average of 2.2 min for the 2A technique.    Conclusion  Which  VMAT  technique is best suited for clinical implementation for the treatment of prostate cancer may be dictated by the individual patient and the availability of departmental resources.

Comparing four volumetric modulated arc therapy beam arrangements for the treatment of early‐stage prostate cancer