Premium
SU‐E‐T‐807: VMAT Vs. DIMRT Vs. SsIMRT Assessing the Dosimetric Parameters of Cervical Carcinoma Treatment with a 20‐Patient Sample
Author(s) -
Duan J
Publication year - 2015
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 - 10.1118/1.4925171
Subject(s) - medicine , nuclear medicine , multileaf collimator , dosimetry , rectum , radiation therapy , cervical carcinoma , radiation treatment planning , radiology , cervical cancer , surgery , cancer
Purpose: The purpose of this study is to assess the dosimetric parameters of cervical carcinoma treatment using 3 different radiation therapy delivery Methods: volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT), the static‐field dynamic multileaf collimator intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (dIMRT) and the static‐field step‐and‐shoot intensity‐modulated radiotherapy (ssIMRT). Methods: Twenty patients with cervical carcinoma were selected to be planned with dual arc VMAT, dIMRT and ssIMRT using Monaco 3.3 TPS on the Axesse™ linear accelerator in this investigation. The total dose of the planning target volume (PTV) is 60Gy. The homogeneity index (HI), conformity index (CI), dose volume histograms (DVHs), delivery efficiency, dose of organs at risks (bladder, rectum, and femoral heads), were all measured. Results: Dose distribution in 3 different radiation therapy delivery methods satisfied clinical requirements. Mean HI of PTV with VMAT, dIMRT and ssIMRT is 1.08, 1.10, and 1.09 (p>0.05). Mean CI of PTV with VMAT, dIMRT and ssIMRT is 0.82, 0.8 and 0.8 (p>0.05). For the DVH of V10, V20 and V30 in bladder, there was a significant difference: VMAT>dIMRT=ssIMRT (p <0.05). For the DVH of V40 and V50, there was a significant difference: VMAT dIMRT >ssIMRT (p <0.05). Conclusion: The results show that VMAT has a great advantage in delivery efficiency than dIMRT and ssIMRT, without compromise to the PTV coverage, HI and CI. The delivery methods should be considered under the actual cervical carcinoma radiotherapy situation.