Suppr超能文献

机器人放射外科中的可变环形准直器:是否比迷你多叶准直器更有效率?

Variable circular collimator in robotic radiosurgery: a time-efficient alternative to a mini-multileaf collimator?

机构信息

Department of Radiation Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center-Daniel den Hoed Cancer Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Nov 1;81(3):863-70. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.12.052. Epub 2011 Mar 4.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Compared with many small circular beams used in CyberKnife treatments, beam's eye view-shaped fields are generally more time-efficient for dose delivery. However, beam's eye view-shaping devices, such as a mini-multileaf collimator (mMLC), are not presently available for CyberKnife, although a variable-aperture collimator (Iris, 12 field diameters; 5-60 mm) is available. We investigated whether the Iris can mimic noncoplanar mMLC treatments using a limited set of principal beam orientations (nodes) to produce time-efficient treatment plans.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

The data from 10 lung cancer patients and the beam-orientation optimization algorithm "Cycle" were used to generate stereotactic treatment plans (3 × 20 Gy) for a CyberKnife virtually equipped with a mMLC. Typically, 10-16 favorable beam orientations were selected from 117 available robot node positions using beam's eye view-shaped fields with uniform fluence. Second, intensity-modulated Iris plans were generated by inverse optimization of nonisocentric circular candidate beams targeted from the same nodes selected in the mMLC plans. The plans were evaluated using the mean lung dose, lung volume receiving ≥20 Gy, conformality index, number of nodes, beams, and monitor units, and estimated treatment time.

RESULTS

The mMLC plans contained an average of 12 nodes and 11,690 monitor units. For a comparable mean lung dose, the Iris plans contained 12 nodes, 64 beams, and 21,990 monitor units. The estimated fraction duration was 12.2 min (range, 10.8-13.5) for the mMLC plans and 18.4 min (range, 12.9-28.5) for the Iris plans. In contrast to the mMLC plans, the treatment time for the Iris plans increased with an increasing target volume. The Iris plans were, on average, 40% longer than the corresponding mMLC plans for small targets (<80 cm(3)) and ≤121% longer for larger targets. For a comparable conformality index, similar results were obtained.

CONCLUSION

For stereotactic lung irradiation, time-efficient and high-quality plans were obtained for robotic-controlled noncoplanar treatments using a mMLC. Iris is a time-efficient alternative for small targets, with similar or better plan quality.

摘要

目的

与 CyberKnife 治疗中使用的许多小圆形射束相比,射束视线形野通常在剂量传递方面更有效率。然而,尽管可以使用可变孔径准直器(Iris,12 个射束直径;5-60mm),但目前 CyberKnife 中尚无射束视线形设备,例如微型多叶准直器(mMLC)。我们研究了使用有限数量的主射束方向(节点)是否可以模仿非共面 mMLC 治疗,以生成有效率的治疗计划。

方法与材料

使用来自 10 例肺癌患者的数据和束眼观优化算法“Cycle”,为配备有 mMLC 的虚拟 CyberKnife 生成立体定向治疗计划(3×20Gy)。通常,从 117 个可用机器人节点位置中选择 10-16 个有利的射束方向,使用均匀通量的射束视线形野。其次,通过从 mMLC 计划中选择的相同节点靶向非等中心圆形候选射束进行逆优化,生成强度调制的 Iris 计划。使用平均肺剂量、肺体积接受≥20Gy、适形性指数、节点数、射束数和监视器单位以及估计的治疗时间来评估计划。

结果

mMLC 计划平均包含 12 个节点和 11690 个监视器单位。对于可比的平均肺剂量,Iris 计划包含 12 个节点、64 个射束和 21990 个监视器单位。mMLC 计划的分馏持续时间估计为 12.2 分钟(范围为 10.8-13.5),而 Iris 计划的分馏持续时间为 18.4 分钟(范围为 12.9-28.5)。与 mMLC 计划相比,Iris 计划的治疗时间随靶区体积的增加而增加。对于较小的靶区(<80cm3),Iris 计划平均比相应的 mMLC 计划长 40%,而对于较大的靶区,Iris 计划最长可达 121%。对于可比的适形性指数,得到了类似的结果。

结论

对于立体定向肺部照射,使用配备 mMLC 的机器人控制非共面治疗可以获得有效率和高质量的计划。对于较小的靶区,Iris 是一种有效率的替代方案,具有相似或更好的计划质量。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验