Premium
SU‐E‐T‐478: Sliding Window Multi‐Criteria IMRT Optimization
Author(s) -
Craft D,
Bokrantz R,
Papp D,
Unkelbach J
Publication year - 2014
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 - 10.1118/1.4888811
Subject(s) - sliding window protocol , pareto principle , fluence , pareto optimal , computer science , plan (archaeology) , radiation treatment planning , window (computing) , mathematical optimization , fidelity , floor plan , surface (topology) , dosimetry , algorithm , mathematics , multi objective optimization , optics , nuclear medicine , physics , radiation therapy , geometry , engineering drawing , engineering , telecommunications , history , laser , archaeology , operating system , medicine
Purpose: To demonstrate a method for what‐you‐see‐is‐what‐you‐get multi‐criteria Pareto surface navigation for step and shoot IMRT treatment planning. Methods: We show mathematically how multiple sliding window treatment plans can be averaged to yield a single plan whose dose distribution is the dosimetric average of the averaged plans. This is incorporated into the Pareto surface navigation based approach to treatment planning in such a way that as the user navigates the surface, the plans he/she is viewing are ready to be delivered (i.e. there is no extra ‘segment the plans’ step that often leads to unacceptable plan degradation in step and shoot Pareto surface navigation). We also describe how the technique can be applied to VMAT. Briefly, sliding window VMAT plans are created such that MLC leaves paint out fluence maps every 15 degrees or so. These fluence map leaf trajectories are averaged in the same way the static beam IMRT ones are. Results: We show mathematically that fluence maps are exactly averaged using our leaf sweep averaging algorithm. Leaf transmission and output factor corrections effects, which are ignored in this work, can lead to small errors in terms of the dose distributions not being exactly averaged even though the fluence maps are. However, our demonstrations show that the dose distributions are almost exactly averaged as well. We demonstrate the technique both for IMRT and VMAT. Conclusions: By turning to sliding window delivery, we show that the problem of losing plan fidelity during the conversion of an idealized fluence map plan into a deliverable plan is remedied. This will allow for multicriteria optimization that avoids the pitfall that the planning has to be redone after the conversion into MLC segments due to plan quality decline. David Craft partially funded by RaySearch Laboratories.