z-logo
Premium
MO‐D‐BRB‐09: IMRT Ad‐Hoc Adaption ‐ Initial Results for Prostate: A Retrospective Planning Study
Author(s) -
Gainey M,
Bratengeier K,
Polat B,
Meyer J,
Flentje M
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.3182219
Subject(s) - prostate , rectum , nuclear medicine , medicine , radiation treatment planning , plan (archaeology) , computer science , medical physics , radiology , radiation therapy , cancer , surgery , geology , paleontology
Purpose: A planning study was performed to investigate the geometry‐based adaption of a step and shoot IMRT‐plan. Method and Materials: Six cases with large rectum and prostate deformations were selected. A 9 field IMRT‐plan (A) was planned on a first CT(CT1). The plan fulfilled all requirements for prostate IMRT in our clinic and its quality was comparable to a conventional high‐quality step and shoot IMRT plan. For a second CT(CT2), three plans were considered: the original plan with optimized isocentre position (B), a newly optimised plan (C) and the original plan, adapted using optimization rules (D), based on a geometry‐based concept called “2‐Step IMRT”. Several DVH‐parameters were utilized for quantification of plan quality: CTV D99, central PTV D95, V95 for an outer PTV, V80 and V50 for rectum and bladder. Results: Unlike B, D achieved almost the same target coverage as plan C. For the OARs, the rectum V80 was slightly increased for the original plan. The volume with more than 95% of the target dose was 1.5 ± 1.5 cm 3 for C, compared to 2.2 ± 1.3 cm 3 for A in CT1 and 7.2 ± 4.8 cm 3 in CT2. D resulted in 4.3 ± 2.1 cm 3 , an intermediate dose load to the rectum. All other parameters were comparable for C and D in contrast to the results from B. Conclusion: The first results for adaptation using the 2‐Step IMRT algorithm are encouraging. The plans were superior to plans with optimised isocentre position B and only marginally worse than a newly optimized plan C. Computerisation is needed to accelerate the procedure, which is currently performed manually. Checks have to be developed to allow an ad‐hoc application of the adapted plan.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here