We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
A Systematic Analysis of 2 Monoisocentric Techniques for the Treatment of Multiple Brain Metastases.
Technology in Cancer Research & Treatment 2017 October
BACKGROUND: In this treatment planning study, we compare the plan quality and delivery parameters for the treatment of multiple brain metastases using 2 monoisocentric techniques: the Multiple Metastases Element from Brainlab and the RapidArc volumetric-modulated arc therapy from Varian Medical Systems.
METHODS: Eight patients who were treated in our institution for multiple metastases (3-7 lesions) were replanned with Multiple Metastases Element using noncoplanar dynamic conformal arcs. The same patients were replanned with the RapidArc technique in Eclipse using 4 noncoplanar arcs. Both techniques were designed using a single isocenter. Plan quality metrics (conformity index, homogeneity index, gradient index, and R50% ), monitor unit, and the planning time were recorded. Comparison of the Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans was performed using Shapiro-Wilk test, paired Student t test, and Wilcoxon signed rank test.
RESULTS: A paired Wilcoxon signed rank test between Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc showed comparable plan quality metrics and dose to brain. Mean ± standard deviation values of conformity index were 1.8 ± 0.7 and 1.7 ± 0.6, homogeneity index were 1.3 ± 0.1 and 1.3 ± 0.1, gradient index were 5.0 ± 1.8 and 5.1 ± 1.9, and R50% were 4.9 ± 1.8 and 5.0 ± 1.9 for Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans, respectively. Mean brain dose was 2.3 and 2.7 Gy for Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans, respectively. The mean value of monitor units in Multiple Metastases Element plan was 7286 ± 1065, which is significantly lower than the RapidArc monitor units of 9966 ± 1533 ( P < .05).
CONCLUSION: For the planning of multiple brain lesions to be treated with stereotactic radiosurgery, Multiple Metastases Element planning software produced equivalent conformity, homogeneity, dose falloff, and brain V12 Gy but required significantly lower monitor units, when compared to RapidArc plans.
METHODS: Eight patients who were treated in our institution for multiple metastases (3-7 lesions) were replanned with Multiple Metastases Element using noncoplanar dynamic conformal arcs. The same patients were replanned with the RapidArc technique in Eclipse using 4 noncoplanar arcs. Both techniques were designed using a single isocenter. Plan quality metrics (conformity index, homogeneity index, gradient index, and R50% ), monitor unit, and the planning time were recorded. Comparison of the Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans was performed using Shapiro-Wilk test, paired Student t test, and Wilcoxon signed rank test.
RESULTS: A paired Wilcoxon signed rank test between Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc showed comparable plan quality metrics and dose to brain. Mean ± standard deviation values of conformity index were 1.8 ± 0.7 and 1.7 ± 0.6, homogeneity index were 1.3 ± 0.1 and 1.3 ± 0.1, gradient index were 5.0 ± 1.8 and 5.1 ± 1.9, and R50% were 4.9 ± 1.8 and 5.0 ± 1.9 for Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans, respectively. Mean brain dose was 2.3 and 2.7 Gy for Multiple Metastases Element and RapidArc plans, respectively. The mean value of monitor units in Multiple Metastases Element plan was 7286 ± 1065, which is significantly lower than the RapidArc monitor units of 9966 ± 1533 ( P < .05).
CONCLUSION: For the planning of multiple brain lesions to be treated with stereotactic radiosurgery, Multiple Metastases Element planning software produced equivalent conformity, homogeneity, dose falloff, and brain V12 Gy but required significantly lower monitor units, when compared to RapidArc plans.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices 
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app