• Title/Summary/Keyword: FSPB

Search Result 3, Processing Time 0.021 seconds

Skin Dose Comparison of CyberKnife and Helical Tomotherapy for Head-and-Neck Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy

  • Yoon, Jeongmin;Park, Kwangwoo;Kim, Jin Sung;Kim, Yong Bae;Lee, Ho
    • Progress in Medical Physics
    • /
    • v.30 no.1
    • /
    • pp.1-6
    • /
    • 2019
  • Purpose: This study conducts a comparative evaluation of the skin dose in CyberKnife (CK) and Helical Tomotherapy (HT) to predict the accurate dose of radiation and minimize skin burns in head-and-neck stereotactic body radiotherapy. Materials and Methods: Arbitrarily-defined planning target volume (PTV) close to the skin was drawn on the planning computed tomography acquired from a head-and-neck phantom with 19 optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters (OSLDs) attached to the surface (3 OSLDs were positioned at the skin close to PTV and 16 OSLDs were near sideburns and forehead, away from PTV). The calculation doses were obtained from the MultiPlan 5.1.2 treatment planning system using raytracing (RT), finite size pencil beam (FSPB), and Monte Carlo (MC) algorithms for CK. For HT, the skin dose was estimated via convolution superposition (CS) algorithm from the Tomotherapy planning station 5.0.2.5. The prescribed dose was 8 Gy for 95% coverage of the PTV. Results and Conclusions: The mean differences between calculation and measurement values were $-1.2{\pm}3.1%$, $2.5{\pm}7.9%$, $-2.8{\pm}3.8%$, $-6.6{\pm}8.8%$, and $-1.4{\pm}1.8%$ in CS, RT, RT with contour correction (CC), FSPB, and MC, respectively. FSPB showed a dose error comparable to RT. CS and RT with CC led to a small error as compared to FSPB and RT. Considering OSLDs close to PTV, MC minimized the uncertainty of skin dose as compared to other algorithms.

Study of $\textrm{IMFAST}^{TM}$ Segmentation Algorithm with CORVUS TPS for Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (세기조절 방사선 치료에서 CORVUS TPS를 이용한 $\textrm{IMFAST}^{TM}$ Segmentation Algorithm의 연구)

  • Lee, Se-Byeong;Jino Bak;Cho, Kwang-Hwan;Chu, Sung-Sil;Lee, Chang-Geol;Lee, Suk;Hongryll Pyo;Suh, Chang-Ok
    • Progress in Medical Physics
    • /
    • v.13 no.4
    • /
    • pp.181-186
    • /
    • 2002
  • The IMRT planning depends on the algorithm of each planning system and MLC performance of each Linac system. Yonsei Cancer Center introduced an IMRT System at the beginning of February, 2002. The system consists of CORVUS (Nomos, U.S.A.) treatment planning system, LANTIS, PRIMEVIEW and PRIMART (Siemens, U.S.A) linac system. The optimization of CORVUS planning system with PRIMART is an important task to make a desirable quality treatment plan. Our Step & Shoot IMRT system uses Finite Size Pencil Beams (FSPB) dose model, simulated annealing optimization algorithm and IMFAST segmentation algorithm. We constructed treatment plans for four different patient cases with two basic beamlet sizes, 1.0$\times$1.0 $\textrm{cm}^2$ and 0.5$\times$1.0 $\textrm{cm}^2$, and four intensity steps, 5%, 10%, 20%, 33%. Each case's plan was evaluated with the dose volume histograms of target volumes and delivery efficiencies. The patient case of small target volume is sensitive at the change of intensity map's segmentation and it highlighted an effective treatment plan at marrow intensity step and small basic projection beamlet.

  • PDF

Optimization of CORVUS Planning System with PRIMART Linac for Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy

  • Lee, Se-Byeong;Jino Bak;Cho, Kwang-Hwan;Chu, Sung-sil;Lee, Suk;Suh, Chang-ok
    • Proceedings of the Korean Society of Medical Physics Conference
    • /
    • 2002.09a
    • /
    • pp.83-85
    • /
    • 2002
  • Yonsei Cancer Center introduced an IMRT System at the beginning of February, 2002. The system consists of CORVUS(NOMOS) inverse planning machine, LANTIS(SIEMENS), PRIMEVIEW and PRIMART Linac(SIEMENS). The optimization of CORVUS planning system with PRIMART is an important work to get an efficient treatment plan. So, we studied two Finite Size Pencil Beams, 1.0 x 1.0 cm$^2$ and 0.5 x 1.0 cm$^2$, and four leaf transmission sets, 5%, 10%, 20%, 33%. We compared the dose distribution of target volume and delivery efficiency of the plan results.

  • PDF