Fondazione Policlinico Universitario ''A. Gemelli'' IRCCS, Roma, Italy; Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy.
Phys Med. 2021 May;85:72-78. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2021.05.002. Epub 2021 May 9.
VMAT delivery technique is currently not applicable to Magnetic Resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT) hybrid systems. Aim of this study is to evaluate an innovative VMAT-like (VML) delivery technique.
First, planning and dosimetric evaluation of the MRgRT VML treatment have been performed on 10 different disease sites and the results have been compared with the corresponding IMRT plans. Then, in the second phase, 10 of the most dosimetrically challenging locally advanced pancreas treatment plans have been retrospectively re-planned using the VML approach to explore the potentiality of this new delivery technique. Finally, VML robustness was evaluated and compared with the IMRT plans, considering a lateral positioning error of ± 5 mm.
In phase one, all VML plans were within constraint for all OARs. When PTV coverage is considered, in the 50% of the cases VML PTV coverage is equal or higher than in IMRT plan. In the remaining 50%, the highest target under coverage difference in comparison with IMRT plan is -1.71%. The mean and maximum treatment time differences (VML-IMRT) is 0.2 min and 3.1 min respectively. In phase two, the treatment time variation (VML-IMRT), shows a mean, maximum and minimum variations of 1.3, 4.6 and -0.6 min respectively. All VML plans have a better target coverage if compared with IMRT plans, keeping in any case the OARs constraints within tolerance. VML doesn't increase plan robustness.
VMAT-like treatment approach appeared to be an efficient planning solution and it was decided to clinically implement it in daily practice, especially in the frame of hypo fractionated treatments.
VMAT 投递技术目前不适用于磁共振引导放射治疗(MRgRT)混合系统。本研究旨在评估一种创新的 VMAT 样(VML)投递技术。
首先,对 10 个不同的疾病部位进行了 MRgRT VML 治疗的计划和剂量评估,并将结果与相应的调强放疗(IMRT)计划进行了比较。然后,在第二阶段,回顾性地使用 VML 方法重新规划了 10 个最具挑战性的局部晚期胰腺治疗计划,以探索这种新投递技术的潜力。最后,考虑到侧向定位误差为±5mm,评估了 VML 的稳健性,并与 IMRT 计划进行了比较。
在第一阶段,所有 VML 计划在所有 OAR 中都符合限制条件。当考虑到 PTV 覆盖时,在 50%的情况下,VML PTV 覆盖与 IMRT 计划相等或更高。在其余的 50%中,与 IMRT 计划相比,目标覆盖差异的最高值为-1.71%。平均和最大治疗时间差异(VML-IMRT)分别为 0.2 分钟和 3.1 分钟。在第二阶段,治疗时间变化(VML-IMRT)的平均值、最大值和最小值分别为 1.3、4.6 和-0.6 分钟。与 IMRT 计划相比,所有 VML 计划都能更好地覆盖目标,同时在任何情况下都将 OAR 限制保持在耐受范围内。VML 并没有增加计划的稳健性。
VML 样治疗方法似乎是一种有效的计划解决方案,决定在日常实践中临床实施,特别是在分次治疗框架内。