Craniospinal Irradiation: A Dosimetric Comparison Between O-Ring Linac and Conventional C-arm Linac

被引:3
|
作者
Stroubinis, Theodoros [1 ]
Psarras, Michalis [1 ]
Zygogianni, Anna [2 ]
Protopapa, Maria [1 ]
Kouloulias, Vassilis [3 ]
Platoni, Kalliopi [4 ]
机构
[1] Mediterraneo Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol & Stereotact Radiosurg, Athens, Greece
[2] Natl & Kapodistrian Univ Athens, Aretaieion Univ Hosp, Sch Med, Dept Radiol 1,Radiat Oncol Unit, Athens, Greece
[3] Natl & Kapodistrian Univ Athens, Attikon Univ Hosp, Sch Med, Dept Radiol 2,Radiat Oncol Unit, Athens, Greece
[4] Natl & Kapodistrian Univ Athens, Attikon Univ Hosp, Sch Med, Dept Radiol 2,Med Phys Unit, Athens, Greece
关键词
INTENSITY-MODULATED RADIOTHERAPY; GRADIENT JUNCTION TECHNIQUE; RADIATION-THERAPY;
D O I
10.1016/j.adro.2022.101139
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: The aim of this study was to perform a dosimetric evaluation between craniospinal irradiation volumetric modulated arc therapy plans designed for an O-Ring and a conventional C-arm Linac.Methods and Materials: Two adult patients were selected for this study. Two plans were designed one for a TrueBeam Edge and one for Halcyon O-ring Linac for each patient. The evaluation of the plans was conducted in terms of dose volume histogram analysis of the target volume and organs at risk (OARs) along with total plan monitor units and beam-on time. Paired sample t test was performed to compare Dmax and Dmean of OARs for each plan's comparison. The delivery of volumetric modulated arc therapy plans was evaluated using Octavius 4D phantom.Results: All plans demonstrated dose distributions with sufficient planned target volume conformity and homogeneity. The Homogeneity Index and Conformity Index for all plans were found comparable. The paired sample t test did not demonstrate significant difference in terms of Dmax and Dmean of OARs between plans for both patients. All plans met the threshold of 90%, withConclusions: Craniospinal irradiation plans generated for Halcyon and Edge are equivalent in terms of plan quality and dose sparing at OARs. The small variations may have originated from the differences in beam profile or mean energy, the degree of the modulation for each plan and characteristics of multi leaf collimators for each treatment unit. Halcyon is able to deliver a distinctly faster treatment, but Edge provides an automatic rotational correction for patient positioning.& COPY; 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Society for Radiation Oncology. This is an open access
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Dosimetric comparison between VMAT plans using the fast-rotating O-ring linac with dual-layer stacked MLC and helical tomotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma
    Ju, Sang Gyu
    Ahn, Yong Chan
    Kim, Yeong-bi
    Kim, Jin Man
    Kwon, Dong Yeol
    Park, Byoung Suk
    Yang, Kyungmi
    RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2022, 17 (01)
  • [22] Dosimetric comparison between VMAT plans using the fast-rotating O-ring linac with dual-layer stacked MLC and helical tomotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma
    Sang Gyu Ju
    Yong Chan Ahn
    Yeong-bi Kim
    Jin Man Kim
    Dong Yeol Kwon
    Byoung Suk Park
    Kyungmi Yang
    Radiation Oncology, 17
  • [23] Dosimetric feasibility of brain stereotactic radiosurgery with a 0.35 T MRI-guided linac and comparison vs a C-arm-mounted linac
    Slagowski, Jordan M.
    Redler, Gage
    Malin, Martha J.
    Cammin, Jochen
    Lobb, Eric C.
    Lee, Brian H.
    Sethi, Anil
    Roeske, John C.
    Flores-Martinez, Everardo
    Stevens, Tynan
    Yenice, Kamil M.
    Green, Olga
    Mutic, Sasa
    Aydogan, Bulent
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2020, 47 (11) : 5455 - 5466
  • [24] The spatial accuracy of ring-mounted halcyon linac versus C-arm TrueBeam linac for single-isocenter/multi-target SBRT treatment
    Pokhrel, Damodar
    Mallory, Richard
    Bernard, Mark E.
    MEDICAL DOSIMETRY, 2023, 48 (03) : 170 - 175
  • [25] Halcyon clinical performance evaluation: A log file-based study in comparison with a C-arm Linac
    Wang, Ruoxi
    Du, Yi
    Yao, Kaining
    Liu, Zhuolun
    Wang, Hanlin
    Yue, Haizhen
    Zhang, Yibao
    Wu, Hao
    PHYSICA MEDICA-EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2020, 71 : 14 - 23
  • [26] Dosimetric Analysis of Optimum Non-Collisional Trajectory Modulated Arc Deliveries for Intracranial Lesions Under Conventional C-Arm Linac Phase Space Geometry
    Khan, S.
    Chin, E.
    Xing, L.
    Hristov, D.
    Fahimian, B.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2017, 44 (06) : 3225 - 3226
  • [27] Treatment plan quality for stereotactic treatment of multiple cranial metastases: Comparison of C-arm and O-ring treatment platforms
    Shiba, S.
    Trauernicht, C.
    Robar, J. L.
    MEDICAL DOSIMETRY, 2025, 50 (01) : 47 - 56
  • [28] Triage Schema for O-Ring vs. C-Arm Gantry Machine Load Balancing
    Fehrs, S.
    Carr, B.
    Luca, K.
    Ghavidel, B.
    Axente, M.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2024, 120 (02): : E529 - E529
  • [29] Craniospinal Irradiation of Pediatric Medulloblastoma, Dosimetric Comparison between Helical Tomotherapy, and Conventional Radiation Therapy
    Hegazy, Mohamed W.
    Shehadeh, Maamoun
    MIDDLE EAST JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2022, 13 (04) : 701 - 707
  • [30] Examination of Conversion Method of Dose Distribution of Lung Cancer IMRT Using Fluence Reversible Calculation Function in O-Ring Type Linac and C Type Linac
    Rachi, T.
    Tanaka, Y.
    Togo, H.
    Raturi, V. P.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2021, 111 (03): : E145 - E145