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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |