Advantages of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) over other radiotherapy techniques

Boyd, Michael E.

doi:10.1117/12.580873

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The efficacy and usefulness of stereotactic radiosurgery and stereotactic radiation therapy (SRS/ SRT) over conventional radiotherapy have been well-established by many investigators. [1][2][3] Modern radiotherapy techniques are based on precise target localisation and implementation of multiple coplanar or non-coplanar beams to deliver a highly precise and conformal radiation dose to the tumour while administering the minimal dose to normal tissues. Consequently, the dose per fraction to target the tumour may be increased to a very high level as compared with the conventional fractionation, exempting the need to give time for normal tissue healing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of intracranial stereotactic treatment plans: a comparison study of CyberKnife and TrueBeam systems

Shahban,

Rizwan,

Nazia

et al. 2024

J Radiother Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) for patients with intracranial tumours are delivered using a dedicated platform or a conventional linear accelerator with a flattening filter-free beam. Materials and methods: This study compares treatment plans with intracranial tumours. A total of 29 patients were treated on CyberKnife and planned using the Accuray Precision. The same structure sets ws then exported to Varian Eclipse, and plans were made using a 6 MV FFF beam. Both plans were compared for parameters of target coverage, homogeneity index (HI), new conformity index (nCI), gradient index, selectivity index (SI), volumetric and OAR doses. Results: The treatment plans made for CyberKnife exhibit better results in terms of nCI (1·168 ± 0·08 versus 1·173 ± 0·077), SI (0·885 ± 0·05 versus 0·877 ± 0·05) and GI (3·64 ± 0·5 versus 4·45 ± 1·25), while HI values are better for TrueBeam. For OAR doses, in 65·5% and 72% of treatment plans, brainstem and optic pathways received lower doses on CyberKnife, respectively. In terms of dose spillage, Truebeam plans are better for very low doses (V5%), while for V10%, V20% and V50% CyberKnife plans are better. Conclusion: CyberKnife is a better modality for the delivery of SRS/SRT to intracranial tumours except for dose homogeneity where TrueBeam offered better results.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of intracranial stereotactic treatment plans: a comparison study of CyberKnife and TrueBeam systems

Shahban,

Rizwan,

Nazia

et al. 2024

J Radiother Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The ICRU (International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements) has been involved in the continuous effort to improve uniformity in defining terms and concepts and in specifying radiation doses for reporting in radiotherapy. 1 The commission preserving the surrounding normal tissue 1,5,6 ; this condition gives rise to steep dose gradients away from the target. ST is distinct from conventional radiotherapy and IMRT in several aspects, hence there are limitations to the previous ICRU reports (i.e., ICRU 50, 62, and 83) recommendations for prescribing and reporting STs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Stereotactic treatment (ST) combines stereotactic localization techniques with the delivery of multiple small photon beams to conformally irradiate small targets within the body with high doses, while still preserving the surrounding normal tissue 1,5,6 ; this condition gives rise to steep dose gradients away from the target. ST is distinct from conventional radiotherapy and IMRT in several aspects, hence there are limitations to the previous ICRU reports (i.e., ICRU 50, 62, and 83) recommendations for prescribing and reporting STs 7 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of CyberKnife intracranial treatment plans using ICRU 91 dose reporting: A retrospective study

Conlon

Connolly²,

Galal³

et al. 2023

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ICRU 91, published in 2017, is an international standard for prescribing, recording, and reporting stereotactic treatments. Since its release, there has been limited research published on the implementation and impact of ICRU 91 on clinical practice. This work provides an assessment of the recommended ICRU 91 dose reporting metrics for their use in clinical treatment planning. A set of 180 intracranial stereotactic treatment plans for patients treated by the CyberKnife (CK) system were analyzed retrospectively using the ICRU 91 reporting metrics. The 180 plans comprised 60 trigeminal neuralgia (TGN), 60 meningioma (MEN), and 60 acoustic neuroma (AN) cases. The reporting metrics included the planning target volume (PTV) near‐minimum dose (Dnear−min${D}_{{\rm{near}} - {\rm{min}}}$), near‐maximum dose (Dnear−max${D}_{{\rm{near}} - {\rm{max}}}$), and median dose (D50%${D}_{50{\rm{\% }}}$), as well as the gradient index (GI) and conformity index (CI). The metrics were assessed for statistical correlation with several treatment plan parameters. In the TGN plan group, owing to the small targets, Dnear−min${D}_{{\rm{near}} - {\rm{min}}}$ was greater than Dnear−max${D}_{{\rm{near}} - {\rm{max}}}$ in 42 plans, whereas both metrics were not applicable in 17 plans. The D50%${D}_{50{\rm{\% }}}$ metric was predominantly influenced by the prescription isodose line (PIDL). The GI was significantly dependent on target volume in all analyses performed, where the variables were inversely related. The CI was only dependent on target volume in treatment plans for small targets. The ICRU 91 Dnear−min${D}_{{\rm{near}} - {\rm{min}}}$ and Dnear−max${D}_{{\rm{near}} - {\rm{max}}}$ metrics breakdown in plans for small target volumes below 1 cm3; the Min and Max pixel should be reported in such cases. The D50%${D}_{50{\rm{\% }}}$ metric is of limited use for treatment planning. Given their volume dependence, the GI and CI metrics could potentially serve as plan evaluation tools in the planning of the sites analyzed in this study, which would ultimately improve treatment plan quality.

show abstract

Advantages of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) over other radiotherapy techniques

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Evaluation of intracranial stereotactic treatment plans: a comparison study of CyberKnife and TrueBeam systems

Evaluation of intracranial stereotactic treatment plans: a comparison study of CyberKnife and TrueBeam systems

Analysis of CyberKnife intracranial treatment plans using ICRU 91 dose reporting: A retrospective study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About