2017
DOI: 10.1002/mp.12193
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Still equivalent for dose calculation in the Monte Carlo era? A comparison of free breathing and average intensity projection CT datasets for lung SBRT using three generations of dose calculation algorithms

Abstract: With the capability to more accurately model inhomogeneity, Monte Carlo (Type-C) algorithms are sensitive to respiration-induced local and global tissue density changes and exhibit a strong correlation between dosimetric and density differences. However, FB and AIP CTs may still be considered equivalent for dose calculation in the Monte Carlo era, due to the small magnitude of lung density differences between these two datasets.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

6
26
1
2

Year Published

2018
2018
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(35 citation statements)
references
References 48 publications
6
26
1
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The dose errors observed in this study for Type‐A and Type‐B algorithms are in agreement with numerous previous studies 7, 9, 14, 15. Both algorithms overestimated the target peripheral or “cold spot” indices such as D95% and Dmin, and the magnitude of the overestimation varied widely from case to case.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The dose errors observed in this study for Type‐A and Type‐B algorithms are in agreement with numerous previous studies 7, 9, 14, 15. Both algorithms overestimated the target peripheral or “cold spot” indices such as D95% and Dmin, and the magnitude of the overestimation varied widely from case to case.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…The simulation and contouring process was as previously described 15. Briefly, patients were simulated with a free‐breathing 3D CT followed by a 4D CT.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These results are in contrast with our current study where neither AAA nor AXB algorithms predicted a dose error at isocenter to be greater than 2% over a target density variation spanning a delta on the order of 200 HU. More recently, in a 20 patient study conducted by Zvolanek et al treatment plans based on FB image sets were compared with AIP plans calculated for PBC, AAA, AXB and Voxel Monte Carlo (VMC) algorithms [27]. Even though their computations were done using multiple treatment planning systems, they found dose-differences to be small for Type C computations, so concluded FB and AIP image sets were essentially clinically equivalent.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To date, a limited number of studies have been conducted to compare different image generated datasets [2227]. However, no systematic study exists to determine which is better for dose computation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%