Dosimetric comparison of robotic- and LINAC-based treatment of spine stereotactic body radiotherapy

dc.authorid0000-0002-3936-080X
dc.authorid0000-0002-9732-4241
dc.contributor.authorAcar, Hilal
dc.contributor.authorYazıcı, Ömer
dc.contributor.authorÜnal, Dilek
dc.date.accessioned2022-10-31T07:16:47Z
dc.date.available2022-10-31T07:16:47Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.departmentİstanbul Medipol Üniversitesi, Tıp Fakültesi, Dahili Tıp Bilimleri Bölümü, Radyasyon Onkolojisi Ana Bilim Dalı
dc.description.abstractTo determine which treatment technique and modality would offer better dosimetric results and be preferable for spinal stereotactic body therapy (SBRT) depending on the three different regions of the vertebrae. Linear accelerator (LINAC)- and CyberKnife (CK)-based treatment techniques were compared in terms of their dosimetric quality, treatment efficiency, and delivery accuracy. Thirty previously treated patients were included in this study. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques were used for LINAC-based treatment, whereas CK-based treatment plans were generated for two different collimator systems: fixed and multileaf collimator (MLC). The plans were compared based on spinal cord sparing, dose homogeneity, conformity index (CI), gradient index (GI), monitor unit (MU), and beam-on time. The percentage volumes of V2Gy, V5Gy (representing volume low of the dose spillage region), V10Gy, and V20Gy (representing the volume of the high-dose spillage region) of the healthy tissue were analyzed. The CI and GI of the VMAT plans were better than those of the IMRT plans. For spinal cord sparing, the VMAT and MLC-based CK (CK-MLC) techniques were superior. The percentage of low-dose spillage regions was the lowest for IMRT and fixed cone-based CK (CK-FIX) plans. The percentage of the high-dose spillage region was the lowest for the VMAT and CK-MLC plans. In terms of treatment efficiency, the VMAT and CK-MLC plans were superior to the IMRT and CK-FIX plans. The VMAT technique lowered the MU and beam-on time values. The plan delivery accuracy of the VMAT and CK-FIX plans was better than that of the IMRT plans. VMAT is the best option for LINAC-based spinal SBRT. For CK-based spinal SBRT, MLC-based plans are preferred. If the clinic has both treatment modalities and the patient can tolerate long treatment times, CK-MLC-based treatment should be chosen because of its superiority in sparing the spinal cord and sharp dose fall-off.
dc.identifier.citationAcar, H., Yazıcı, Ö. ve Ünal, D. (2022). Dosimetric comparison of robotic- and LINAC-based treatment of spine stereotactic body radiotherapy. Medical Dosimetry, 47(4), 348-355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2022.08.002
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.meddos.2022.08.002
dc.identifier.endpage355
dc.identifier.issn0958-3947
dc.identifier.issn1873-4022
dc.identifier.issue4
dc.identifier.pmid36180324
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85140060875
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3
dc.identifier.startpage348
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2022.08.002
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12511/9892
dc.identifier.volume47
dc.identifier.wos000886274900008en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Science
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopus
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMed
dc.institutionauthorAcar, Hilal
dc.institutionauthorYazıcı, Ömer
dc.institutionauthorÜnal, Dilek
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherElsevier Inc.
dc.relation.ispartofMedical Dosimetryen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
dc.subjectCyberknife
dc.subjectFIX Cone
dc.subjectIMRT
dc.subjectMLC
dc.subjectSpine SBRT
dc.subjectVMAT
dc.titleDosimetric comparison of robotic- and LINAC-based treatment of spine stereotactic body radiotherapy
dc.typeArticle

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Küçük Resim Yok
İsim:
Acar-Hilal-2022.pdf
Boyut:
1.36 MB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Açıklama:
Tam Metin / Full Text