Cargando…

Comparison of treatment plan quality of VMAT for esophageal carcinoma with: flattening filter beam versus flattening filter free beam

Purpose: To investigate the difference in treatment plan quality of volumetric modulated arc treatment (VMAT) for esophageal carcinoma with flattening filter beam (FF) and flattening filter free beam (FFF). Material and methods: A total of fifty-six treatment plans were generated for twenty eight es...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sun, Wen-zhao, Chen, Li, Yang, Xin, Wang, Bin, Deng, Xiao-wu, Huang, Xiao-yan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Ivyspring International Publisher 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6160692/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30271485
http://dx.doi.org/10.7150/jca.26044
_version_ 1783358821530337280
author Sun, Wen-zhao
Chen, Li
Yang, Xin
Wang, Bin
Deng, Xiao-wu
Huang, Xiao-yan
author_facet Sun, Wen-zhao
Chen, Li
Yang, Xin
Wang, Bin
Deng, Xiao-wu
Huang, Xiao-yan
author_sort Sun, Wen-zhao
collection PubMed
description Purpose: To investigate the difference in treatment plan quality of volumetric modulated arc treatment (VMAT) for esophageal carcinoma with flattening filter beam (FF) and flattening filter free beam (FFF). Material and methods: A total of fifty-six treatment plans were generated for twenty eight esophageal carcinoma patients with flattening filter beam and flattening filter free beam, using same optimal parameters. The homogeneity index (HI) and conformal index (CI) of targets, and some special points on Dose-Volume Histogram (DVH) curves were used to compare the plan quality. The coverage volumes of 45 Gy, 30 Gy and 20 Gy outside targets (V(45Gy), V(30Gy) and V(20Gy)) were used to compare the targets peripheral dose. The MU numbers, measured delivery time and averaged dose rates were used to evaluate the delivery efficiency of treatment plans. Results: A significant decreasing in peripheral dose around targets was found using FFF beams while the dose distributions in targets were equivalent to the plans with FF beams. V(45Gy), V(30Gy) and V(20Gy) were decreased by 6.46%, 88.18% and 4.40%, respectively. A significant increase in MUs and decrease in treatment time were also found in delivery test. The average MUs was increased by 21.83% and the average treatment time was reduced by down to 11.9%. Conclusions: For esophageal carcinoma, the research showed that the treatment plans with FFF beams could get comparable dose distribution in targets and could significantly reduce the peripheral dose around targets compared to the plans with FF beams.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6160692
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Ivyspring International Publisher
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61606922018-09-28 Comparison of treatment plan quality of VMAT for esophageal carcinoma with: flattening filter beam versus flattening filter free beam Sun, Wen-zhao Chen, Li Yang, Xin Wang, Bin Deng, Xiao-wu Huang, Xiao-yan J Cancer Research Paper Purpose: To investigate the difference in treatment plan quality of volumetric modulated arc treatment (VMAT) for esophageal carcinoma with flattening filter beam (FF) and flattening filter free beam (FFF). Material and methods: A total of fifty-six treatment plans were generated for twenty eight esophageal carcinoma patients with flattening filter beam and flattening filter free beam, using same optimal parameters. The homogeneity index (HI) and conformal index (CI) of targets, and some special points on Dose-Volume Histogram (DVH) curves were used to compare the plan quality. The coverage volumes of 45 Gy, 30 Gy and 20 Gy outside targets (V(45Gy), V(30Gy) and V(20Gy)) were used to compare the targets peripheral dose. The MU numbers, measured delivery time and averaged dose rates were used to evaluate the delivery efficiency of treatment plans. Results: A significant decreasing in peripheral dose around targets was found using FFF beams while the dose distributions in targets were equivalent to the plans with FF beams. V(45Gy), V(30Gy) and V(20Gy) were decreased by 6.46%, 88.18% and 4.40%, respectively. A significant increase in MUs and decrease in treatment time were also found in delivery test. The average MUs was increased by 21.83% and the average treatment time was reduced by down to 11.9%. Conclusions: For esophageal carcinoma, the research showed that the treatment plans with FFF beams could get comparable dose distribution in targets and could significantly reduce the peripheral dose around targets compared to the plans with FF beams. Ivyspring International Publisher 2018-09-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6160692/ /pubmed/30271485 http://dx.doi.org/10.7150/jca.26044 Text en © Ivyspring International Publisher This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY-NC) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). See http://ivyspring.com/terms for full terms and conditions.
spellingShingle Research Paper
Sun, Wen-zhao
Chen, Li
Yang, Xin
Wang, Bin
Deng, Xiao-wu
Huang, Xiao-yan
Comparison of treatment plan quality of VMAT for esophageal carcinoma with: flattening filter beam versus flattening filter free beam
title Comparison of treatment plan quality of VMAT for esophageal carcinoma with: flattening filter beam versus flattening filter free beam
title_full Comparison of treatment plan quality of VMAT for esophageal carcinoma with: flattening filter beam versus flattening filter free beam
title_fullStr Comparison of treatment plan quality of VMAT for esophageal carcinoma with: flattening filter beam versus flattening filter free beam
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of treatment plan quality of VMAT for esophageal carcinoma with: flattening filter beam versus flattening filter free beam
title_short Comparison of treatment plan quality of VMAT for esophageal carcinoma with: flattening filter beam versus flattening filter free beam
title_sort comparison of treatment plan quality of vmat for esophageal carcinoma with: flattening filter beam versus flattening filter free beam
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6160692/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30271485
http://dx.doi.org/10.7150/jca.26044
work_keys_str_mv AT sunwenzhao comparisonoftreatmentplanqualityofvmatforesophagealcarcinomawithflatteningfilterbeamversusflatteningfilterfreebeam
AT chenli comparisonoftreatmentplanqualityofvmatforesophagealcarcinomawithflatteningfilterbeamversusflatteningfilterfreebeam
AT yangxin comparisonoftreatmentplanqualityofvmatforesophagealcarcinomawithflatteningfilterbeamversusflatteningfilterfreebeam
AT wangbin comparisonoftreatmentplanqualityofvmatforesophagealcarcinomawithflatteningfilterbeamversusflatteningfilterfreebeam
AT dengxiaowu comparisonoftreatmentplanqualityofvmatforesophagealcarcinomawithflatteningfilterbeamversusflatteningfilterfreebeam
AT huangxiaoyan comparisonoftreatmentplanqualityofvmatforesophagealcarcinomawithflatteningfilterbeamversusflatteningfilterfreebeam