scholarly journals Comparison of treatment plans calculated by Ray Tracing and Monte Carlo algorithms for head and thorax radiotherapy with Cyberknife

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 647-650 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kirsten Galonske ◽  
Martin Thiele ◽  
Iris Ernst ◽  
Ralph Lehrke ◽  
Waldemar Zylka
Keyword(s):  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Ray Tracing ◽  
Stereotactic Radiotherapy ◽  
Calculation Algorithm ◽  
Monte Carlo Algorithms ◽  
Body Regions ◽  
Calculation Algorithms ◽  
Treatment Plans ◽  
Homogeneous Regions ◽  
Tumor Types

AbstractThis study investigates differences between treatment plans generated by Ray Tracing (RT) and Monte Carlo (MC) calculation algorithms in homogeneous and heterogeneous body regions. Particularly, we focus on the head and on the thorax, respectively, for robotic stereotactic radiotherapy and radiosurgery with Cyberknife. Radiation plans for tumors located in the head and in the thorax region have been calculated and compared to each other in 47 cases and several tumor types.Assuming MC as the algorithm of highest accuracy it is shown that based on selected dose parameters, RT slightly underestimates the dose in homogeneous regions and overestimates in heterogeneous regions. In addition, deviations occur due to tumor size rendering large differences for small tumors. We conclude that dose prescriptions for radiotherapy treatments should differentiate between RT and MC calculation algorithm. This is especially important for small tumors in heterogeneous body regions.

scholarly journals Validation of the Acuros XB dose calculation algorithm versus Monte Carlo for clinical treatment plans

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (8) ◽  
pp. 3909-3915 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lone Hoffmann ◽  
Markus Alber ◽  
Matthias Söhn ◽  
Ulrik Vindelev Elstrøm
Keyword(s):  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Dose Calculation ◽  
Clinical Treatment ◽  
Calculation Algorithm ◽  
Dose Calculation Algorithm ◽  
Acuros Xb ◽  
Treatment Plans

scholarly journals Comparing the clinical outcomes in stereotactic body radiotherapy for lung tumors between Ray-Tracing and Monte-Carlo algorithms

Oncotarget ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 7 (14) ◽  
pp. 19045-19053 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin Ho Song ◽  
Ki Mun Kang ◽  
Hoon-Sik Choi ◽  
Hojin Jeong ◽  
In Bong Ha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Ray Tracing ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy ◽  
Lung Tumors ◽  
Monte Carlo Algorithms

scholarly journals Comparison of Ray Tracing and Monte Carlo Calculation Algorithms for Spine Lesions Treated with CyberKnife

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Li ◽  
Xile Zhang ◽  
Yuxi Pan ◽  
Hongqing Zhuang ◽  
Ruijie Yang
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Ray Tracing ◽  
Thoracic Spine ◽  
Organs At Risk ◽  
Target Coverage ◽  
Dose Volume Histograms ◽  
Percentage Volume ◽  
Calculation Algorithms ◽  
Sacral Spine

Abstract Purpose: This study attempts to evaluate Ray Tracing (RT) and Monte Carlo (MC) algorithm for CyberKnife treatments of spine lesions and determine whether MC algorithm is necessary for all spine treatment and analyze which sites of spine lesion for which RT algorithm is comparable to MC algorithm. Methods: The CyberKnife is used for stereotactic body radiotherapy for lesions in the cervical spine (30), thoracic spine (50), lumbar spine (30) and sacral spine (15). Dose was calculated using RT and MC algorithms for patients planned with the same beam angles and monitor units. Dose-volume histograms of the target and selected critical structures are evaluated. Results: The average target coverage of prescribed dose with MC algorithms was 94.80%, 88.47%, 92.52% and 93.41% respectively in cervical, thoracic, lumbar and sacral spine. For thoracic spine, RT algorithm significantly overestimates the percentage volume of target covered by the prescribed dose, as well as overestimates doses to organs at risk in most cases, including lung, spinal cord and esophagus. For cervical, lumbar and sacral spine, the differences of the target coverage of prescription dose were generally less than 3% between the RT and MC algorithms. The differences of doses to organs at risk varied with lesion sites and surrounding organs. Conclusions: In the thoracic spine lesions with beams through air cavities, RT algorithm should be limited and verified with MC algorithm, but the RT algorithm is adequate for treatment of cervical, lumbar and sacral spine lesions without or small amount of beams passing through the lungs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document