Leszczyński Wojciech, Slosarek Krzysztof, Szlag Marta
Department of Radiotherapy and Brachytherapy Planning, Maria Skłodowska-Curie Memorial Cancer Center and Institute of Oncology Gliwice Branch, Poland.
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2012 Aug 10;17(6):347-51. doi: 10.1016/j.rpor.2012.05.002. eCollection 2012.
The aim was to provide a dosimetric comparison between IMRT and RapidArc treatment plans with RPI index with simultaneous comparison of the treatment delivery time.
IMRT and RapidArc provide highly conformal dose distribution with good sparing of normal tissues. However, a complex spatial dosimetry of IMRT and RapidArc plans hampers the evaluation and comparison between plans calculated for the two modalities. RPI was used in this paper for treatment plan comparisons. The duration of the therapeutic session in RapidArc is reported to be shorter in comparison to therapeutic time of the other dynamic techniques. For this reasons, total treatment delivery time in both techniques was compared and discussed.
15 patients with prostate carcinoma were randomly selected for the analysis. Two competitive treatment plans using respectively the IMRT and RapidArc techniques were computed for each patient in Eclipse planning system v. 8.6.15. RPIwin(®) application was used for RPI calculations for each treatment plan. Additionally, total treatment time was compared between IMRT and RapidArc plans. Total treatment time was a sum of monitor units (MU) for each treated field.
The mean values of the RPI indices were insignificantly higher for IMRT plans in comparison to rotational therapy. Comparison of the mean numbers of monitor units confirmed that the use of rotational technique instead of conventional static field IMRT can significantly reduce the treatment time.
Analysis presented in this paper, demonstrated that RapidArc can compete with the IMRT technique in the field of treatment plan dosimetry reducing the time required for dose delivery.
本研究旨在对调强放疗(IMRT)和容积旋转调强放疗(RapidArc)治疗计划进行剂量学比较,并采用相对物理剂量指数(RPI)进行评估,同时比较两种治疗方式的治疗实施时间。
IMRT和RapidArc能够提供高度适形的剂量分布,对正常组织具有良好的保护作用。然而,IMRT和RapidArc计划复杂的空间剂量学特性阻碍了对这两种治疗方式所计算计划的评估与比较。本文采用RPI对治疗计划进行比较。据报道,与其他动态技术相比,RapidArc的治疗疗程持续时间更短。因此,对这两种技术的总治疗实施时间进行了比较和讨论。
随机选取15例前列腺癌患者进行分析。在Eclipse计划系统v. 8.6.15中,为每位患者分别计算了采用IMRT和RapidArc技术的两种竞争性治疗计划。使用RPIwin(®)应用程序对每个治疗计划进行RPI计算。此外,还比较了IMRT和RapidArc计划的总治疗时间。总治疗时间为每个照射野的监测单位(MU)之和。
与旋转治疗相比,IMRT计划的RPI指数平均值略高,但差异不显著。监测单位平均数的比较证实,采用旋转技术而非传统静态野IMRT可显著缩短治疗时间。
本文分析表明,在治疗计划剂量学方面,RapidArc可与IMRT技术相媲美,且能减少剂量输送所需时间。