The dosimetric comparison using anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and Acuros XB algorithms in the target overlapping with air cavity of pituitary carcinoma

Israngkul-Na-Ayuthaya, I.; Suriyapee, Sivalee; Sanghamthum, Taweap

doi:10.21037/tro-20-57

Cited by 1 publication

(5 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The correlation shown in Figure 2 can be used to estimate the dose difference between calculation algorithms. In particular, the differences at near minimum dose (D 98% ) and D 95% were larger than those at D 50% and near maximum dose (D 2% ), similar to the results reported by Israngkul et al [ 14 ]. It means that the dose difference between the D 95% prescription and others becomes more pronounced.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

“…The difference in dosage between AAA and AXB caused by an air cavity present within the PTV depends on various factors such as the size and distance of the cavity, field size, and the density of the surrounding medium [ 8 , 13 , 14 , 21 ]. Rana et al reported that smaller field sizes and longer cavity distances result in larger AAA and AXB dose differences in the air regions for beam from a gantry angle of 0 degree [ 21 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…95% volume of PTV 70Gy was covered by the 100% of the prescribed dose. The cylindrical air structure (−1000 Hounsfield unit: HU) of 50 cm in length was placed at the center of the cylinder phantom [ 14 , 17 ], and the diameter of the air structure was incremented by 1 cm from 0 to 6 cm ( Fig. 1 ).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, in high-density metal structures, Pawalowski et al reported that AAA overestimates doses by more than 10%, AXB doses are in good agreement with Monte Carlo simulations and actual measurements [12]. Therefore, AXB is recommended for accurate dose calculation of regions with heterogeneity, such as air and bone in the head and neck region [13][14][15]. However, Israngkul et al reported that the dose delivered to 95% volume of targets (D 95% ) calculated by the AXB were reduced by approximately 28% compared with the AAA in the case of a small target and large air content for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) of pituitary carcinoma [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Therefore, AXB is recommended for accurate dose calculation of regions with heterogeneity, such as air and bone in the head and neck region [13][14][15]. However, Israngkul et al reported that the dose delivered to 95% volume of targets (D 95% ) calculated by the AXB were reduced by approximately 28% compared with the AAA in the case of a small target and large air content for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) of pituitary carcinoma [14]. Therefore, using the same dose prescription method (i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Dose difference between anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and Acuros XB (AXB) caused by target’s air content for volumetric modulated arc therapy of head and neck cancer

Ito,

Monzen,

Kubo

et al. 2023

Rep Pract Oncol Radiother.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background We clarified the dose difference between the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and Acuros XB (AXB) with increasing target’s air content using a virtual phantom and clinical cases. Materials and methods Whole neck volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan was transferred into a virtual phantom with a cylindrical air structure at the center. The diameter of the air structure was changed from 0 to 6 cm, and the target’s air content defined as the air/planning target volume (PTV) in percent (air/PTV) was varied. VMAT plans were recalculated by AAA and AXB with the same monitor unit (MU) and multi-leaf collimator (MLC) motions. The dose at each air/PTV (5%–30%) was compared between each algorithm with D 98% , D 95% , D 50% and D 2% for the PTV. In addition, MUs were also compared with the same MLC motions between the D 95% prescription with AAA (AAA_D 95% ), AXB_D 95% , and the prescription to 100% minus air/PTV (AXB_D 100%-air/PTV ) in clinical cases of head and neck (HNC). Results When air/PTV increased (5–30%), the dose differences between AAA and AXB for D 98% , D 95% , D 50% and D 2% were 3.08–15.72%, 2.35–13.92%, 0.63–4.59%, and 0.14–6.44%, respectively. At clinical cases with air/PTV of 5.61% and 28.19%, compared to AAA_D 95% , the MUs differences were, respectively, 2.03% and 6.74% for AXB_D 95% and 1.80% and 0.50% for AXB_D 100%-air/PTV . Conclusion The dose difference between AAA and AXB increased as the target’s air content increased, and AXB_D 95% resulted in a dose escalation over AAA_D 95% when the target’s air content was ≥ 5%. The D 100%-air/PTV of PTV using AXB was comparable to the D 95% of PTV using AAA.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%