Calvo-Ortega Juan F, Delgado David, Moragues Sandra, Pozo Miquel, Casals Joan
Department of Radiation Oncology, Hospital Quirón Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
J Cancer Res Ther. 2016 Apr-Jun;12(2):852-7. doi: 10.4103/0973-1482.163680.
To dosimetrically compare the fixed gantry intensity modulated radiosurgery (IMRS) with dynamic conformal arc radiosurgery (DCARS) for cranial lesions. This study investigates whether IMRS can be an adequate dosimetric alternative to DCARS for cranial stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS).
Forty-five SRS procedures for solitary brain metastasis (range: 0.44-29.18 cm 3) performed at our institution were selected for this study. Two plans were generated per patient: One IMRS plan using a multileaf collimation (MLC) of 5 mm, and one DCARS plan designed with a 3 mm micro-MLC. Dosimetric comparison metrics include the target coverage (Cov), conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), gradient index (GI), and volume of the normal brain tissue receiving ≥12 Gy (V12). In addition, maximum doses to organs at risk (OAR) (brainstem, optic apparatus and cochlea) were compared for both techniques.
Compared to DCARS, IMRS improved mean CI (IMRS: 0.81 vs.
0.63, P < 0.001), with no significant difference in target Cov (IMRS: 0.99 vs.
0.99, P > 0.05), HI (IMRS: 1.22 vs.
1.24, P > 0.05), GI (IMRS: 5.44 vs.
5.44, P > 0.05). A weak significant difference in V12 (IMRS: 4.6 cm 3 vs. 5.2 cm 3, P = 0.033) was obtained. Subgroup analysis per target volume (small: <1 cm 3, intermediate: ≤1 cm 3 and <5 cm 3 and large: ≥5 cm 3) only revealed the statistically difference for CI metric (P < 0.001). No significant differences were found for maximum dose to the OAR.
We have shown that IMRS provides the dosimetric advantages compared with DCARS. Based on the dosimetric findings in this study, fixed gantry IMRS technique can be adopted as a standard procedure for cranial SRS when micro-MLC technology is not available on the linear accelerator.
通过剂量学方法比较固定机架强度调制放射外科(IMRS)与动态适形弧放射外科(DCARS)治疗颅脑病变的效果。本研究旨在探讨在颅脑立体定向放射外科(SRS)中,IMRS在剂量学方面是否可作为DCARS的合适替代方法。
选取我院进行的45例孤立性脑转移瘤SRS治疗病例(范围:0.44 - 29.18 cm³)纳入本研究。为每位患者制定两个计划:一个使用5 mm多叶准直器(MLC)的IMRS计划,以及一个采用3 mm微型MLC设计的DCARS计划。剂量学比较指标包括靶区覆盖率(Cov)、适形指数(CI)、均匀性指数(HI)、梯度指数(GI)以及接受≥12 Gy照射的正常脑组织体积(V12)。此外,还比较了两种技术对危及器官(OAR)(脑干、视觉器官和耳蜗)的最大剂量。
与DCARS相比,IMRS的平均CI有所改善(IMRS:0.81 vs. DCARS:0.63,P < 0.001),靶区Cov无显著差异(IMRS:0.99 vs. DCARS:0.99,P > 0.05),HI无显著差异(IMRS:1.22 vs. DCARS:1.24,P > 0.05),GI无显著差异(IMRS:5.44 vs. DACRS:5.44,P > 0.05)。V12存在微弱显著差异(IMRS:4.6 cm³ vs. 5.2 cm³,P = 0.033)。按靶区体积进行亚组分析(小:<1 cm³,中:≤¹ cm³且<5 cm³,大:≥5 cm³),仅CI指标存在统计学差异(P < 0.001)。两种技术对OAR的最大剂量无显著差异。
我们已表明IMRS与DCARS相比具有剂量学优势。基于本研究的剂量学结果,当直线加速器上没有微型MLC技术时,固定机架IMRS技术可作为颅脑SRS的标准程序采用。