Dosimetric analysis and comparison of volumetric-modulated arc therapy versus intensity-modulated radiation therapy for liver carcinoma

Author(s):  
Bing-Hao Chiang ◽  
Erich Schnell ◽  
Kerry Hibbitts ◽  
Terence Herman ◽  
Salahuddin Ahmad

Abstract Aim: This study dosimetrically compared volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT) for patients with liver carcinoma. Materials and methods: Ten patients with liver carcinoma previously treated with IMRT or VMAT were retrospectively selected for this study. Each patient received a total dose of 54 Gy in 1·8 Gy fractions. Dosimetric evaluations for each patient were performed using the dose–volume histograms (DVHs) for planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OAR). All dosimetric parameters were statistically analysed using mean values, standard deviations and p-values for determining the significance. The conformality index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) were calculated and compared. For efficiency evaluation, monitor units (MUs) and beam on times (BOT) were recorded. Results: Compared to IMRT, VMAT plans showed significant differences in the heterogeneity with p < 0·01 and insignificant differences in both conformality and normal tissue sparing. VMAT required marginally fewer mean MU and shorter BOT when compared to IMRT with insignificant differences. Conclusions: For radiation therapy treatment of liver carcinoma, IMRT and VMAT can achieve similar PTV coverage and normal tissue sparing. Treatment time is only marginally shorter with VMAT versus IMRT with insignificant differences.

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 190-192
Author(s):  
Bing-Hao Chiang ◽  
Kerry Hibbitts ◽  
Heather Ortega ◽  
Terence Herman ◽  
Salahuddin Ahmad

AbstractAim:Volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), an extension of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), employs modifications in gantry rotation speed, machine dose rate and multi-leaf collimator motion to deliver a three-dimensional dose distribution. This study compared VMAT to IMRT for patients with anal carcinoma.Materials and Methods:Sixteen patients previously treated with IMRT were retrospectively selected. Each patient received a total dose of 57·6–63·0 Gy in 1·8 Gy fractions. A single- or double-isocenter multi-arc VMAT treatment plan was generated using Eclipse RapidArc system with the same computed tomography image sets and optimisation constraints used for IMRT. Dose–volume histograms (DVHs) for planning target volumes (PTVs) and organs at risk (OARs), and monitor units (MUs) and beam on times (BOTs) were used for comparison. Results:IMRT and VMAT plans showed insignificant differences in PTV homogeneity and conformity and sparing hips and bowel. VMAT required fewer mean MU and shorter BOT per plan (1,597 MU, 2·66 min) compared to IMRT (2,571 MU, 4·29 min) with p < 0·0001. Conclusions:Fewer MU and shorter BOT for VMAT may decrease the damage from secondary radiation and treatment delivery uncertainty due to intra-fraction tumour motion, leading to higher machine throughput and improving patient comfort, with less treatment time.


2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 339-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adil S. Akthar ◽  
Anthony C. Wong ◽  
Akash D. Parekh ◽  
Greg Hubert ◽  
Christina H. Son ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document