Noninvasive cardiac radioablation for ventricular tachycardia: dosimetric comparison between linear accelerator- and robotic CyberKnife-based radiosurgery systems

BACKGROUND: Few dosimetric comparisons have been published between linear accelerator (LA)-based systems and CyberKnife (CK)-based robotic radiosurgery systems for cardiac radio-ablation in ventricular tachycardia. This study aimed to compare the dosimetry of noninvasive cardiac radio-ablation deliverable on LA with that on CK. METHODS: Thirteen patients who underwent noninvasive cardiac radio-ablation by LA were included. The prescribed dose was 25 Gy in 1 fraction, and the average planning target volume was 49.8 ± 31.0 cm(3) (range, 14.4–93.7 cm(3)). CK plans were generated for comparison. RESULTS: Both the CK and LA plans accomplished appropriate dose coverage and normal tissue sparing. Compared with the LA plans, the CK plans achieved significantly lower gradient indices (3.12 ± 0.71 vs. 3.48 ± 0.55, p = 0.031) and gradient measures (1.00 ± 0.29 cm vs. 1.17 ± 0.29 cm, p < 0.001). They had similar equivalent conformity indices (CK vs. LA: 0.84 ± 0.08 vs. 0.87 ± 0.07, p = 0.093) and maximum doses 2 cm from the planning target volume (PTV) in any direction (CK vs. LA: 50.8 ± 9.9% vs. 53.1 ± 5.3%, p = 0.423). The dosimetric advantages of CK were more prominent in patients with a PTV of ≤ 50 cm(3) or a spherical PTV. In patients with a PTV of > 50 cm(3) or a non-spherical PTV, the LA and CK plans were similar regarding dosimetric parameters. CK plans involved more beams (232.2 ± 110.8 beams vs. 10.0 ± 1.7 arcs) and longer treatment times (119.2 ± 43.3 min vs. 22.4 ± 1.6 min, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Both CK and LA are ideal modalities for noninvasive cardiac radio-ablation. Upfront treatment should be considered based on clinical intent.