Comparison between the HyperArc™ technique and the CyberKnife® technique for stereotactic treatment of brain metastases

The purpose of this study was to compare the planimetric capacities between HyperArc™-based stereotactic radiosurgery and robotic radiosurgery system-based planning using CyberKnife® M6 for single and multiple cranial metastases. We evaluated 51 treatment plans for cranial metastases, including 30 p...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cancer radiothérapie 2023-04, Vol.27 (2), p.136-144
Hauptverfasser: Guinement, L., Salleron, J., Buchheit, I., Gérard, K., Faivre, J.-C., Royer, P., Marchesi, V.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The purpose of this study was to compare the planimetric capacities between HyperArc™-based stereotactic radiosurgery and robotic radiosurgery system-based planning using CyberKnife® M6 for single and multiple cranial metastases. We evaluated 51 treatment plans for cranial metastases, including 30 patients with a single lesion and 21 patients with multiple lesions, treated with the CyberKnife® M6. These treatment plans were optimized using the HyperArc™ (HA) system with the TrueBeam. The comparison of the quality of the treatment plans between the two treatment techniques (CyberKnife and HyperArc) was performed using the Eclipse treatment planning system. Dosimetric parameters were compared for target volumes and organs at risk. Coverage of the target volumes was equivalent between the two techniques, whereas median Paddick conformity index and median gradient index for all target volumes were 0.9 and 3.4, respectively for HyperArc plans, and 0.8 and 4.5 for CyberKnife plans (P
ISSN:1278-3218
1769-6658
DOI:10.1016/j.canrad.2022.08.007