Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “MODULES”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 181 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2013

A retrospective planning analysis comparing intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) using two optimization algorithms for the treatment of early-stage prostate cancer

The primary aim of this study is to compare intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) to volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for the radical treatment of prostate cancer using version 10.0 (v10.0) of Varian Medical Systems, RapidArc radiation oncology system. Particular focus was placed on plan quality and the implications on departmental resources. The secondary objective was to compare the results in v10.0 to the preceding version 8.6 (v8.6). Twenty prostate cancer cases were retrospectively planned using v10.0 of Varian's Eclipse and RapidArc software. Three planning techniques were performed: a 5-field IMRT, VMAT using one arc (VMAT-1A), and VMAT with two arcs (VMAT-2A). Plan quality was assessed by examining homogeneity, conformity, the number of monitor units (MUs) utilized, and dose to the organs at risk (OAR). Resource implications were assessed by examining planning and treatment times. The results obtained using v10.0 were also compared to those previously reported by our group for v8.6. In v10.0, each technique was able to produce a dose distribution that achieved the departmental planning guidelines. The IMRT plans were produced faster than VMAT plans and displayed improved homogeneity. The VMAT plans provided better conformity to the target volume, improved dose to the OAR, and required fewer MUs. Treatments using VMAT-1A were significantly faster than both IMRT and VMAT-2A. Comparison between versions 8.6 and 10.0 revealed that in the newer version, VMAT planning was significantly faster and the quality of the VMAT dose distributions produced were of a better quality. VMAT (v10.0) using one or two arcs provides an acceptable alternative to IMRT for the treatment of prostate cancer. VMAT-1A has the greatest impact on reducing treatment time.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2013

Retrospective evaluation of dosimetric quality for prostate carcinomas treated with 3D conformal, intensity modulated and volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy

This study examines and compares the dosimetric quality of radiotherapy treatment plans for prostate carcinoma across a cohort of 163 patients treated across five centres: 83 treated with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), 33 treated with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and 47 treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Treatment plan quality was evaluated in terms of target dose homogeneity and organs at risk (OAR), through the use of a set of dose metrics. These included the mean, maximum and minimum doses; the homogeneity and conformity indices for the target volumes; and a selection of dose coverage values that were relevant to each OAR. Statistical significance was evaluated using two-tailed Welch's T-tests. The Monte Carlo DICOM ToolKit software was adapted to permit the evaluation of dose metrics from DICOM data exported from a commercial radiotherapy treatment planning system. The 3DCRT treatment plans offered greater planning target volume dose homogeneity than the other two treatment modalities. The IMRT and VMAT plans offered greater dose reduction in the OAR: with increased compliance with recommended OAR dose constraints, compared to conventional 3DCRT treatments. When compared to each other, IMRT and VMAT did not provide significantly different treatment plan quality for like-sized tumour volumes. This study indicates that IMRT and VMAT have provided similar dosimetric quality, which is superior to the dosimetric quality achieved with 3DCRT.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2014

Volumetric modulated arc therapy versus step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiation therapy in the treatment of large nerve perineural spread to the skull base: a comparative dosimetric planning study

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma with large nerve perineural (LNPN) infiltration of the base of skull is a radiotherapeutic challenge given the complex target volumes to nearby organs at risk (OAR). A comparative planning study was undertaken to evaluate dosimetric differences between volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) versus intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the treatment of LNPN. Five consecutive patients previously treated with IMRT for LNPN were selected. VMAT plans were generated for each case using the same planning target volumes (PTV), dose prescriptions and OAR constraints as IMRT. Comparative parameters used to assess target volume coverage, conformity and homogeneity included V95 of the PTV (volume encompassed by the 95% isodose), conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI). In addition, OAR maximum point doses, V20, V30, non-target tissue (NTT) point max doses, NTT volume above reference dose, monitor units (MU) were compared. IMRT and VMAT plans generated were comparable for CI (P = 0.12) and HI (P = 0.89). VMAT plans achieved better V95 (P = < 0.001) and reduced V20 and V30 by 652 cubic centimetres (cc) (28.5%) and 425.7 cc (29.1%), respectively. VMAT increased MU delivered by 18% without a corresponding increase in NTT dose. Compared with IMRT plans for LNPN, VMAT achieved comparable HI and CI.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2016

Intrafraction Motion in Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Versus Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy

Purpose: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for early-stage inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients delivers high doses that require high-precision treatment. Typically, image guidance is used to minimize day-to-day target displacement, but intrafraction position variability is often not corrected. Currently, volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) is replacing intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in many departments because of its shorter delivery time. This study aimed to evaluate whether intrafraction variation in VMAT patients is reduced in comparison with patients treated with IMRT. Methods and Materials: NSCLC patients (197 IMRT and 112 VMAT) treated with a frameless SBRT technique to a prescribed dose of 3 × 18 Gy were evaluated. Image guidance for both techniques was identical: pretreatment cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) (CBCT{sub precorr}) for setup correction followed immediately before treatment by postcorrection CBCT (CBCT{sub postcorr}) for verification. Then, after either a noncoplanar IMRT technique or a VMAT technique, a posttreatment (CBCT{sub postRT}) scan was acquired. The CBCT{sub postRT} and CBCT{sub postcorr} scans were then used to evaluate intrafraction motion. Treatment delivery times, systematic (Σ) and random (σ) intrafraction variations, and associated planning target volume (PTV) margins were calculated. Results: The median treatment delivery time was significantly reduced by 20 minutes (range, 32-12 minutes) using VMAT compared with noncoplanar IMRT. Intrafraction tumor motion was significantly larger for IMRT in all directions up to 0.5 mm systematic (Σ) and 0.7 mm random (σ). The required PTV margins for IMRT and VMAT differed by less than 0.3 mm. Conclusion: VMAT-based SBRT for NSCLC was associated with significantly shorter delivery times and correspondingly smaller intrafraction motion compared with noncoplanar IMRT. However, the impact on the required PTV margin was small.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2017

A Comparison of Non-coplanar Three-dimensional Conformal Radiation Therapy, Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy, and Volumetric Modulated Radiation Therapy for the Delivery of Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy to Peripheral Lung Cancer

The objective of the study was to compare three noncoplanar delivery techniques (three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy [3DCRT], intensity-modulated radiation therapy [IMRT], and volumetric-modulated arc therapy [VMAT]) for the delivery of lung stereotactic ablative radiation therapy to peripheral lung tumours.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2013

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy in a whole-ventricular irradiation: A planning comparison study

This study evaluated the dosimetric difference between volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (cIMRT) in whole-ventricular irradiation. Computed tomography simulation data for 13 patients were acquired to create plans for VMAT and cIMRT. In both plans, the same median dose (100% = 24 Gy) was prescribed to the planning target volume (PTV), which comprised a tumor bed and whole ventricles. During optimization, doses to the normal brain and body were reduced, provided that the dose constraints of the target coverage were satisfied. The dose-volume indices of the PTV, normal brain, and body as well as monitor units were compared between the 2 techniques by using paired t-tests. The results showed no significant difference in the homogeneity index (0.064 vs 0.065; p = 0.824) of the PTV and conformation number (0.78 vs 0.77; p = 0.065) between the 2 techniques. In the normal brain and body, the dose-volume indices showed no significant difference between the 2 techniques, except for an increase in the volume receiving a low dose in VMAT; the absolute volume of the normal brain and body receiving 1 Gy of radiation significantly increased in VMAT by 1.6% and 8.3%, respectively, compared with that in cIMRT (1044 vs 1028 mL for the normal brain and 3079.2 vs 2823.3 mL for the body; p<0.001). The number of monitor units to deliver a 2.0-Gy fraction was significantly reduced in VMAT compared with that in cIMRT (354 vs 873, respectively; p<0.001). In conclusion, VMAT delivers IMRT to complex target volumes such as whole ventricles with fewer monitor units, while maintaining target coverage and conformal isodose distribution comparable to cIMRT; however, in addition to those characteristics, the fact that the volume of the normal brain and body receiving a low dose would increase in VMAT should be considered.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2013

A dosimetric comparative study: Volumetric modulated arc therapy vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy in the treatment of nasal cavity carcinomas

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the differences between volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the treatment of nasal cavity carcinomas. The treatment of 10 patients, who had completed IMRT treatment for resected tumors of the nasal cavity, was replanned with the Philips Pinnacle{sup 3} Version 9 treatment-planning system. The IMRT plans used a 9-beam technique whereas the VMAT (known as SmartArc) plans used a 3-arc technique. Both types of plans were optimized using Philips Pinnacle{sup 3} Direct Machine Parameter Optimization algorithm. IMRT and VMAT plans' quality was compared by evaluating the maximum, minimum, and mean doses to the target volumes and organs at risk, monitor units (MUs), and the treatment delivery time. Our results indicate that VMAT is capable of greatly reducing treatment delivery time and MUs compared with IMRT. The reduction of treatment delivery time and MUs can decrease the effects of intrafractional uncertainties that can occur because of patient movement during treatment delivery. VMAT's plans further reduce doses to critical structures that are in close proximity to the target volume.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2013

Stereotactic body radiation therapy planning with duodenal sparing using volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: A dosimetric analysis

Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) achieves excellent local control for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), but may increase late duodenal toxicity. Volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivers intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with a rotating gantry rather than multiple fixed beams. This study dosimetrically evaluates the feasibility of implementing duodenal constraints for SBRT using VMAT vs IMRT. Non–duodenal sparing (NS) and duodenal-sparing (DS) VMAT and IMRT plans delivering 25 Gy in 1 fraction were generated for 15 patients with LAPC. DS plans were constrained to duodenal D{sub max} of<30 Gy at any point. VMAT used 1 360° coplanar arc with 4° spacing between control points, whereas IMRT used 9 coplanar beams with fixed gantry positions at 40° angles. Dosimetric parameters for target volumes and organs at risk were compared for DS planning vs NS planning and VMAT vs IMRT using paired-sample Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Both DS VMAT and DS IMRT achieved significantly reduced duodenal D{sub mean}, D{sub max}, D{sub 1cc}, D{sub 4%}, and V{sub 20} {sub Gy} compared with NS plans (all p≤0.002). DS constraints compromised target coverage for IMRT as demonstrated by reduced V{sub 95%} (p = 0.01) and D{sub mean} (p = 0.02), but not for VMAT. DS constraints resulted in increased dose to right kidney, spinal cord, stomach, and liver for VMAT. Direct comparison of DS VMAT and DS IMRT revealed that VMAT was superior in sparing the left kidney (p<0.001) and the spinal cord (p<0.001), whereas IMRT was superior in sparing the stomach (p = 0.05) and the liver (p = 0.003). DS VMAT required 21% fewer monitor units (p<0.001) and delivered treatment 2.4 minutes faster (p<0.001) than DS IMRT. Implementing DS constraints during SBRT planning for LAPC can significantly reduce duodenal point or volumetric dose parameters for both VMAT and IMRT. The primary consequence of implementing DS constraints for VMAT is increased dose to other organs at risk, whereas for IMRT it is compromised target coverage. These findings suggest clinical situations where each technique may be most useful if DS constraints are to be employed.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2013

Dosimetric effects of weight loss or gain during volumetric modulated arc therapy and intensity-modulated radiation therapy for prostate cancer

Weight loss or gain during the course of radiation therapy for prostate cancer can alter the planned dose to the target volumes and critical organs. Typically, source-to-surface distance (SSD) measurements are documented by therapists on a weekly basis to ensure that patients' exterior surface and isocenter-to-skin surface distances remain stable. The radiation oncology team then determines whether the patient has undergone a physical change sufficient to require a new treatment plan. The effect of weight change (SSD increase or decrease) on intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) dosimetry is not well known, and it is unclear when rescanning or replanning is needed. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of weight change (SSD increase or decrease) on IMRT or VMAT dose delivery in patients with prostate cancer and to determine the SSD change threshold for replanning. Whether IMRT or VMAT provides better dose stability under weight change conditions was also determined. We generated clinical IMRT and VMAT prostate and seminal vesicle treatment plans for varying SSDs for 10 randomly selected patients with prostate cancer. The differences due to SSD change were quantified by a specific dose change for a specified volume of interest. The target mean dose, decreased or increased by 2.9% per 1-cm SSD decrease or increase in IMRT and by 3.6% in VMAT. If the SSD deviation is more than 1 cm, the radiation oncology team should determine whether to continue treatment without modifications, to adjust monitor units, or to resimulate and replan.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2014

Volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy for pancreatic malignancies: Dosimetric comparison with sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy and 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy

Volumetric-modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) is an iteration of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), both of which deliver highly conformal dose distributions. Studies have shown the superiority of VMAT and IMRT in comparison with 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) in planning target volume (PTV) coverage and organs-at-risk (OARs) sparing. This is the first study examining the benefits of VMAT in pancreatic cancer for doses more than 55.8 Gy. A planning study comparing 3D-CRT, IMRT, and VMAT was performed in 20 patients with pancreatic cancer. Treatments were planned for a 25-fraction delivery of 45 Gy to a large field followed by a reduced-volume 8-fraction external beam boost to 59.4 Gy in total. OARs and PTV doses, conformality index (CI) deviations from 1.0, monitor units (MUs) delivered, and isodose volumes were compared. IMRT and VMAT CI deviations from 1.0 for the large-field and the boost plans were equivalent (large field: 0.032 and 0.046, respectively; boost: 0.042 and 0.037, respectively; p > 0.05 for all comparisons). Both IMRT and VMAT CI deviations from 1.0 were statistically superior to 3D-CRT (large field: 0.217, boost: 0.177; p < 0.05 for all comparisons). VMAT showed reduction of the mean dose to the boost PTV (VMAT: 61.4 Gy, IMRT: 62.4 Gy, and 3D-CRT: 62.3 Gy; p < 0.05). The mean number of MUs per fraction was significantly lower for VMAT for both the large-field and the boost plans. VMAT delivery time was less than 3 minutes compared with 8 minutes for IMRT. Although no statistically significant dose reduction to the OARs was identified when comparing VMAT with IMRT, VMAT showed a reduction in the volumes of the 100% isodose line for the large-field plans. Dose escalation to 59.4 Gy in pancreatic cancer is dosimetrically feasible with shorter treatment times, fewer MUs delivered, and comparable CIs for VMAT when compared with IMRT.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Comparison of testicular dose delivered by intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in patients with prostate cancer

A small decrease in testosterone level has been documented after prostate irradiation, possibly owing to the incidental dose to the testes. Testicular doses from prostate external beam radiation plans with either intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) were calculated to investigate any difference. Testicles were contoured for 16 patients being treated for localized prostate cancer. For each patient, 2 plans were created: 1 with IMRT and 1 with VMAT. No specific attempt was made to reduce testicular dose. Minimum, maximum, and mean doses to the testicles were recorded for each plan. Of the 16 patients, 4 received a total dose of 7800 cGy to the prostate alone, 7 received 8000 cGy to the prostate alone, and 5 received 8000 cGy to the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes. The mean (range) of testicular dose with an IMRT plan was 54.7 cGy (21.1 to 91.9) and 59.0 cGy (25.1 to 93.4) with a VMAT plan. In 12 cases, the mean VMAT dose was higher than the mean IMRT dose, with a mean difference of 4.3 cGy (p = 0.019). There was a small but statistically significant increase in mean testicular dose delivered by VMAT compared with IMRT. Despite this, it unlikely that there is a clinically meaningful difference in testicular doses from either modality.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Whole-brain hippocampal sparing radiation therapy: Volume-modulated arc therapy vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy case study

The hippocampus is responsible for memory and cognitive function. An ongoing phase II clinical trial suggests that sparing dose to the hippocampus during whole-brain radiation therapy can help preserve a patient's neurocognitive function. Progressive research and advancements in treatment techniques have made treatment planning more sophisticated but beneficial for patients undergoing treatment. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare hippocampal sparing whole-brain (HS-WB) radiation therapy treatment planning techniques using volume-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). We randomly selected 3 patients to compare different treatment techniques that could be used for reducing dose to the hippocampal region. We created 2 treatment plans, a VMAT and an IMRT, from each patient's data set and planned on the Eclipse 11.0 treatment planning system (TPS). A total of 6 plans (3 IMRT and 3 VMAT) were created and evaluated for this case study. The physician contoured the hippocampus as per the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) 0933 protocol atlas. The organs at risk (OR) were contoured and evaluated for the plan comparison, which included the spinal cord, optic chiasm, the right and left eyes, lenses, and optic nerves. Both treatment plans produced adequate coverage on the planning target volume (PTV) while significantly reducing dose to the hippocampal region. The VMAT treatment plans produced a more homogenous dose distribution throughout the PTV while decreasing the maximum point dose to the target. However, both treatment techniques demonstrated hippocampal sparing when irradiating the whole brain.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2016

A comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy and sliding-window intensity-modulated radiotherapy in the treatment of Stage I-II nasal natural killer/T-cell lymphoma

This article is aimed to compare the dosimetric differences between volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for Stage I-II nasal natural killer/T-cell lymphoma (NNKTL). Ten patients with Stage I-II NNKTL treated with IMRT were replanned with VMAT (2 arcs). The prescribed dose of the planning target volume (PTV) was 50 Gy in 25 fractions. The VMAT plans with the Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (Version 8.6.15) were based on an Eclipse treatment planning system; the monitor units (MUs) and treatment time (T) were scored to measure the expected treatment efficiency. All the 10 patients under the study were subject to comparisons regarding the quality of target coverage, the efficiency of delivery, and the exposure of normal adjacent organs at risk (OARs). The study shows that VMAT was associated with a better conformal index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) (both p < 0.05) but slightly higher dose to OARs than IMRT. The MUs with VMAT (650.80 ± 24.59) were fewer than with IMRT (1300.10 ± 57.12) (relative reduction of 49.94%, p = 0.00) when using 2-Gy dose fractions. The treatment time with VMAT (3.20 ± 0.02 minutes) was shorter than with IMRT (7.38 ± 0.18 minutes) (relative reduction of 56.64%, p = 0.00). We found that VMAT and IMRT both provide satisfactory target dosimetric coverage and OARs sparing clinically. Likely to deliver a bit higher dose to OARs, VMAT in comparison with IMRT, is still a better choice for treatment of patients with Stage I-II NNKTL, thanks to better dose distribution, fewer MUs, and shorter delivery time.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Skin dose differences between intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy and between boost and integrated treatment regimens for treating head and neck and other cancer sites in patients

The purpose of this study was (1) to evaluate dose to skin between volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment techniques for target sites in the head and neck, pelvis, and brain and (2) to determine if the treatment dose and fractionation regimen affect the skin dose between traditional sequential boost and integrated boost regimens for patients with head and neck cancer. A total of 19 patients and 48 plans were evaluated. The Eclipse (v11) treatment planning system was used to plan therapy in 9 patients with head and neck cancer, 5 patients with prostate cancer, and 5 patients with brain cancer with VMAT and static-field IMRT. The mean skin dose and the maximum dose to a contiguous volume of 2 cm{sup 3} for head and neck plans and brain plans and a contiguous volume of 5 cm{sup 3} for pelvis plans were compared for each treatment technique. Of the 9 patients with head and neck cancer, 3 underwent an integrated boost regimen. One integrated boost plan was replanned with IMRT and VMAT using a traditional boost regimen. For target sites located in the head and neck, VMAT reduced the mean dose and contiguous hot spot most noticeably in the shoulder region by 5.6% and 5.4%, respectively. When using an integrated boost regimen, the contiguous hot spot skin dose in the shoulder was larger on average than a traditional boost pattern by 26.5% and the mean skin dose was larger by 1.7%. VMAT techniques largely decrease the contiguous hot spot in the skin in the pelvis by an average of 36% compared with IMRT. For the same target coverage, VMAT can reduce the skin dose in all the regions of the body, but more noticeably in the shoulders in patients with head and neck and pelvis cancer. We also found that using integrated boost regimens in patients with head and neck cancer leads to higher shoulder skin doses compared with traditional boost regimens.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗
DOE OSTI2016

Dosimetric comparison between step-shoot intensity-modulated radiotherapy and volumetric-modulated arc therapy for upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma

To compare and analyze the dosimetric characteristics of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) vs step-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (sIMRT) for upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma. Single-arc VMAT (VMAT1), dual-arc VMAT (VMAT2), and 7-field sIMRT plans were designed for 30 patients with upper thoracic or cervical esophageal carcinoma. Planning target volume (PTV) was prescribed to 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions, and PTV1 was prescribed to 60 Gy in 28 fractions. The parameters evaluated included dose homogeneity and conformality, dose to organs at risk (OARs), and delivery efficiency. (1) In comparison to sIMRT, VMAT provided a systematic improvement in PTV1 coverage. The homogeneity index of VMAT1 was better than that of VMAT2. There were no significant differences among sIMRT, VMAT1, and VMAT2 in PTV coverage. (2) VMAT1 and VMAT2 reduced the maximum dose of spinal cord as compared with sIMRT (p < 0.05). The rest dose-volume characteristics of OARs were similar. (3) Monitor units of VMAT2 and VMAT1 were more than sIMRT. However, the treatment time of VMAT1, VMAT2, and sIMRT was (2.0 ± 0.2), (2.8 ± 0.3), and (9.8 ± 0.8) minutes, respectively. VMAT1 was the fastest, and the difference was statistically significant. In the treatment of upper thoracic and cervical esophageal carcinoma by the AXESSE linac, compared with 7-field sIMRT, VMAT showed better PTV1 coverage and superior spinal cord sparing. Single-arc VMAT had similar target volume coverage and the sparing of OAR to dual-arc VMAT, with shortest treatment time and highest treatment efficiency in the 3 kinds of plans.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗