Cargando…

Feasibility of using the Vero SBRT system for intracranial SRS

The Vero SBRT system was benchmarked in a planning study against the Novalis SRS system for quality of delivered dose distributions to intracranial lesions and assessing the Vero system's capacity for SRS. A total of 27 patients with one brain lesion treated on the Novalis system, with 3 mm lea...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Burghelea, Manuela, Verellen, Dirk, Gevaert, Thierry, Depuydt, Tom, Poels, Kenneth, Simon, Viorica, Ridder, Mark De
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711224/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24423838
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4437
_version_ 1783283036619538432
author Burghelea, Manuela
Verellen, Dirk
Gevaert, Thierry
Depuydt, Tom
Poels, Kenneth
Simon, Viorica
Ridder, Mark De
author_facet Burghelea, Manuela
Verellen, Dirk
Gevaert, Thierry
Depuydt, Tom
Poels, Kenneth
Simon, Viorica
Ridder, Mark De
author_sort Burghelea, Manuela
collection PubMed
description The Vero SBRT system was benchmarked in a planning study against the Novalis SRS system for quality of delivered dose distributions to intracranial lesions and assessing the Vero system's capacity for SRS. A total of 27 patients with one brain lesion treated on the Novalis system, with 3 mm leaf width MLC and C‐arm gantry, were replanned for Vero, with a 5 mm leaf width MLC mounted on an O‐ring gantry allowing rotations around both the horizontal and vertical axis. The Novalis dynamic conformal arc (DCA) planning included vertex arcs, using 90° couch rotation. These vertex arcs cannot be reproduced with Vero due to the mechanical limitations of the O‐ring gantry. Alternative class solutions were investigated for the Vero. Additionally, to distinguish between the effect of MLC leaf width and different beam arrangements on dose distributions, the Vero class solutions were also applied for Novalis. In addition, the added value of noncoplanar IMRT was investigated in this study. Quality of the achieved dose distributions was expressed in the conformity index (CI) and gradient index (GI), and compared using a paired Student's t‐test with statistical significance for p‐values [Formula: see text]. For lesions larger than 5 cm(3), no statistical significant difference in conformity was observed between Vero and Novalis, but for smaller lesions, the dose distributions showed a significantly better conformity for the Novalis [Formula: see text] mainly due to the smaller MLC leaf width. Using IMRT on Vero reduces this conformity difference to nonsignificant levels. The cutoff for achieving a GI around 3, characterizing a sharp dose falloff outside the target volume was 4 cm(3) for Novalis and 7 cm(3) for Vero using DCA technique. Using noncoplanar IMRT, this threshold was reduced to 3 cm(3) for the Vero system. The smaller MLC and the presence of the vertex fields allow the Novalis system to better conform the dose around the lesion and to obtain steeper dose falloff outside the lesion. Comparable dosimetric characteristics can be achieved with Vero for lesions larger than 3 cm(3) and using IMRT. PACS number: 87.55.D
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5711224
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57112242018-04-02 Feasibility of using the Vero SBRT system for intracranial SRS Burghelea, Manuela Verellen, Dirk Gevaert, Thierry Depuydt, Tom Poels, Kenneth Simon, Viorica Ridder, Mark De J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics The Vero SBRT system was benchmarked in a planning study against the Novalis SRS system for quality of delivered dose distributions to intracranial lesions and assessing the Vero system's capacity for SRS. A total of 27 patients with one brain lesion treated on the Novalis system, with 3 mm leaf width MLC and C‐arm gantry, were replanned for Vero, with a 5 mm leaf width MLC mounted on an O‐ring gantry allowing rotations around both the horizontal and vertical axis. The Novalis dynamic conformal arc (DCA) planning included vertex arcs, using 90° couch rotation. These vertex arcs cannot be reproduced with Vero due to the mechanical limitations of the O‐ring gantry. Alternative class solutions were investigated for the Vero. Additionally, to distinguish between the effect of MLC leaf width and different beam arrangements on dose distributions, the Vero class solutions were also applied for Novalis. In addition, the added value of noncoplanar IMRT was investigated in this study. Quality of the achieved dose distributions was expressed in the conformity index (CI) and gradient index (GI), and compared using a paired Student's t‐test with statistical significance for p‐values [Formula: see text]. For lesions larger than 5 cm(3), no statistical significant difference in conformity was observed between Vero and Novalis, but for smaller lesions, the dose distributions showed a significantly better conformity for the Novalis [Formula: see text] mainly due to the smaller MLC leaf width. Using IMRT on Vero reduces this conformity difference to nonsignificant levels. The cutoff for achieving a GI around 3, characterizing a sharp dose falloff outside the target volume was 4 cm(3) for Novalis and 7 cm(3) for Vero using DCA technique. Using noncoplanar IMRT, this threshold was reduced to 3 cm(3) for the Vero system. The smaller MLC and the presence of the vertex fields allow the Novalis system to better conform the dose around the lesion and to obtain steeper dose falloff outside the lesion. Comparable dosimetric characteristics can be achieved with Vero for lesions larger than 3 cm(3) and using IMRT. PACS number: 87.55.D John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2014-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5711224/ /pubmed/24423838 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4437 Text en © 2014 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Burghelea, Manuela
Verellen, Dirk
Gevaert, Thierry
Depuydt, Tom
Poels, Kenneth
Simon, Viorica
Ridder, Mark De
Feasibility of using the Vero SBRT system for intracranial SRS
title Feasibility of using the Vero SBRT system for intracranial SRS
title_full Feasibility of using the Vero SBRT system for intracranial SRS
title_fullStr Feasibility of using the Vero SBRT system for intracranial SRS
title_full_unstemmed Feasibility of using the Vero SBRT system for intracranial SRS
title_short Feasibility of using the Vero SBRT system for intracranial SRS
title_sort feasibility of using the vero sbrt system for intracranial srs
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5711224/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24423838
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4437
work_keys_str_mv AT burgheleamanuela feasibilityofusingtheverosbrtsystemforintracranialsrs
AT verellendirk feasibilityofusingtheverosbrtsystemforintracranialsrs
AT gevaertthierry feasibilityofusingtheverosbrtsystemforintracranialsrs
AT depuydttom feasibilityofusingtheverosbrtsystemforintracranialsrs
AT poelskenneth feasibilityofusingtheverosbrtsystemforintracranialsrs
AT simonviorica feasibilityofusingtheverosbrtsystemforintracranialsrs
AT riddermarkde feasibilityofusingtheverosbrtsystemforintracranialsrs