Cargando…

Tomotherapy: Comparison of Hi-ART, Tomo-HD, and Radixact

Aim In this study, we compared three generations of tomotherapy (Hi-ART, Tomo-HD, and Radixact). This is to study the difference among tomotherapy systems in terms of dose distribution to planning target volume and organs at risk, and irradiation time.  Materials and methods The treatment planning C...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kurosaki, Hiromasa, Hirayama, Kenta, Takahashi, Masaki, Uematsu, Masahiro, Tate, Etsuko
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9712831/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36465793
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.30949
_version_ 1784841876746010624
author Kurosaki, Hiromasa
Hirayama, Kenta
Takahashi, Masaki
Uematsu, Masahiro
Tate, Etsuko
author_facet Kurosaki, Hiromasa
Hirayama, Kenta
Takahashi, Masaki
Uematsu, Masahiro
Tate, Etsuko
author_sort Kurosaki, Hiromasa
collection PubMed
description Aim In this study, we compared three generations of tomotherapy (Hi-ART, Tomo-HD, and Radixact). This is to study the difference among tomotherapy systems in terms of dose distribution to planning target volume and organs at risk, and irradiation time.  Materials and methods The treatment planning CT and contour information used were seven cases of rectum cancer pre-operative irradiation. The contour information used was the planning target volume, and the organs at risk were set as the bladder and body. Optimization was conducted at each planning station using the parameters that were actually used in a clinical setting. The prescribed radiation dose was 25 Gy in five fractions and normalized at the isodose line, covering 95% of the planning target volume. Results There were no significant differences in planning target volume among the three models. Meanwhile, Hi-ART had a significantly higher dose than Tomo-HD and Radixact at body D(50%). Radixact shortened the irradiation time by approximately 15% compared to Hi-ART/Tomo-HD. Conclusion Planning target volume dose distribution of tomotherapy devices was not different. Radixact required a significantly shorter time than Hi-ART and Tomo-HD.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9712831
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Cureus
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97128312022-12-02 Tomotherapy: Comparison of Hi-ART, Tomo-HD, and Radixact Kurosaki, Hiromasa Hirayama, Kenta Takahashi, Masaki Uematsu, Masahiro Tate, Etsuko Cureus Medical Physics Aim In this study, we compared three generations of tomotherapy (Hi-ART, Tomo-HD, and Radixact). This is to study the difference among tomotherapy systems in terms of dose distribution to planning target volume and organs at risk, and irradiation time.  Materials and methods The treatment planning CT and contour information used were seven cases of rectum cancer pre-operative irradiation. The contour information used was the planning target volume, and the organs at risk were set as the bladder and body. Optimization was conducted at each planning station using the parameters that were actually used in a clinical setting. The prescribed radiation dose was 25 Gy in five fractions and normalized at the isodose line, covering 95% of the planning target volume. Results There were no significant differences in planning target volume among the three models. Meanwhile, Hi-ART had a significantly higher dose than Tomo-HD and Radixact at body D(50%). Radixact shortened the irradiation time by approximately 15% compared to Hi-ART/Tomo-HD. Conclusion Planning target volume dose distribution of tomotherapy devices was not different. Radixact required a significantly shorter time than Hi-ART and Tomo-HD. Cureus 2022-10-31 /pmc/articles/PMC9712831/ /pubmed/36465793 http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.30949 Text en Copyright © 2022, Kurosaki et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Medical Physics
Kurosaki, Hiromasa
Hirayama, Kenta
Takahashi, Masaki
Uematsu, Masahiro
Tate, Etsuko
Tomotherapy: Comparison of Hi-ART, Tomo-HD, and Radixact
title Tomotherapy: Comparison of Hi-ART, Tomo-HD, and Radixact
title_full Tomotherapy: Comparison of Hi-ART, Tomo-HD, and Radixact
title_fullStr Tomotherapy: Comparison of Hi-ART, Tomo-HD, and Radixact
title_full_unstemmed Tomotherapy: Comparison of Hi-ART, Tomo-HD, and Radixact
title_short Tomotherapy: Comparison of Hi-ART, Tomo-HD, and Radixact
title_sort tomotherapy: comparison of hi-art, tomo-hd, and radixact
topic Medical Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9712831/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36465793
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.30949
work_keys_str_mv AT kurosakihiromasa tomotherapycomparisonofhiarttomohdandradixact
AT hirayamakenta tomotherapycomparisonofhiarttomohdandradixact
AT takahashimasaki tomotherapycomparisonofhiarttomohdandradixact
AT uematsumasahiro tomotherapycomparisonofhiarttomohdandradixact
AT tateetsuko tomotherapycomparisonofhiarttomohdandradixact