Premium
SU‐E‐T‐791: Applications of RapidArc in Cervical Esophageal Cancer Radiation Therapy: A Comparison with Fixed‐Field IMRT in Dosimetry and Implementation
Author(s) -
Chen J,
Yin Y
Publication year - 2011
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 - 10.1118/1.3612755
Subject(s) - medicine , dosimetry , nuclear medicine , radiation therapy , cervical cancer , field size , radiology , cancer
Purpose: Comparing fixed‐field intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (f‐IMRT) with intensity‐modulated arc therapy (IMAT) treatment plans in dosimetry and practical application for cervical esophageal carcinoma.Methods: For ten cervical esophageal carcinoma cases, f‐IMRT plan (7 fixed‐fields) and two IMAT plans, namely RA (co‐planar 360° arcs) and RAx (co‐planar 360° arcs without sectors from 80° to 110°, and 250° to 280°). DVHs were adopted for the statistics of above parameters, as well as conformal index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), dose‐volumetric parameters of normal tissues, total accelerator output MUs, and total treatment time.Results: There were differences between RAx and f‐IMRT as well as RA in PTV parameters such as HI, V95% and V110%, but not in CI. RAx reduced lung V5 from (50.9±9.8)% in f‐IMRT and (51.4±10.8)% in RA to (49.3±10.4)% in RAx (P<0.05). However, lung V30, V40, V50 and MLD increased in RAx. There was no difference in the mean heart dose in three plans. Total MU was reduced from 1174.8±144.6 in f‐IMRT to 803.8±122.2 in RA and 736.2±186.9 in RAx (P<0.05) Conclusions: Compared with fIMRT, IMAT reduced low dose volumes of lung and total MU on the basis of meeting clinical requirements.