The dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spinal SBRT using four commercial treatment planning algorithms

To evaluate the dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spine SBRT using four dose calculation algorithms. Twenty patients with titanium implants in the spine treated with SBRT without density override (DO) were selected. The clinical plan for each patient was created in Pinnacle and subsequently...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 2023-10, Vol.24 (10), p.e14070-e14070
Hauptverfasser: Liu, Chieh-Wen, Cho, Young-Bin, Magnelli, Anthony, Angelov, Lilyana, Balagamwala, Ehsan H, Chao, Samuel T, Xia, Ping
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e14070
container_issue 10
container_start_page e14070
container_title Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
container_volume 24
creator Liu, Chieh-Wen
Cho, Young-Bin
Magnelli, Anthony
Angelov, Lilyana
Balagamwala, Ehsan H
Chao, Samuel T
Xia, Ping
description To evaluate the dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spine SBRT using four dose calculation algorithms. Twenty patients with titanium implants in the spine treated with SBRT without density override (DO) were selected. The clinical plan for each patient was created in Pinnacle and subsequently imported into Eclipse (AAA and AcurosXB) and Raystation (CC) for dose evaluation with and without DO to the titanium implant. We renormalized all plans such that 90% of the tumor volume received the prescription dose and subsequently evaluated the following dose metrics: (1) the maximum dose to 0.03 cc (Dmax), dose to 99% (D99%) and 90% (D90%) of the tumor volume; (2) Dmax and volumetric metrics of the spinal cord. For the same algorithm, plans with and without DO had similar dose distributions. Differences in Dmax, D99% and D90% of the tumor were on average 10% in both D99% and Dmax of the tumor, and Dmax of the spinal cord were observed. For all algorithms, the presence of titanium implants in the spine for most patients had minimal impact on dose distributions with and without DO. For the same plan calculated with different algorithms, larger differences in volumetric metrics of >10% could be observed, impacted by dose gradient at the plan normalization volume, tumor volumes, plan complexity, and partial voxel volume interpolation.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/acm2.14070
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10562029</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A790631134</galeid><sourcerecordid>A790631134</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-d3992c3adf17985e2d3cbda991ddf0726d40fc15a2773b843f215d5fc464e6963</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkVtrFDEUx0OxtLX2xQ8gAV9E2DW3mUyepBZ7gYKg2-eQzWU3ZZKsSabgtzfj1tKWPJxwzu9c_wC8x2iJESJflA5kiRni6ACc4I70CyEwe_PsfwzelnKPEMYDHY7AMeUdQ2hgJyCsthaaVHywNXsNfdgpXWFysPqqop_C7BpVrAX6CMvORzXCX99-ruBUfNxAl6YMdQrBZu1bqGararCxwjkrzogaNyn7ug3lHTh0aiz27NGegrvL76uL68Xtj6ubi_PbhWac1YWhQhBNlXGYi6GzxFC9NqptYoxDnPSGIadxpwjndD0w6gjuTOc065ntRU9Pwdd93d20DtboNk5Wo9xlH1T-I5Py8mUk-q3cpAeJUdcTRESr8OmxQk6_J1uqDL5oO7adbJqKJAPrBREDnpt9fIXet5u0M80UZ93AKaeNWu6pjRqt9NGl1li3Z2zwOkXrfPOfc4F6ijFlLeHzPkHnVEq27ml8jOSsu5x1l_90b_CH5ws_of-Fpn8BIHGqKA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2874587373</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spinal SBRT using four commercial treatment planning algorithms</title><source>Wiley Journals</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Liu, Chieh-Wen ; Cho, Young-Bin ; Magnelli, Anthony ; Angelov, Lilyana ; Balagamwala, Ehsan H ; Chao, Samuel T ; Xia, Ping</creator><creatorcontrib>Liu, Chieh-Wen ; Cho, Young-Bin ; Magnelli, Anthony ; Angelov, Lilyana ; Balagamwala, Ehsan H ; Chao, Samuel T ; Xia, Ping</creatorcontrib><description>To evaluate the dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spine SBRT using four dose calculation algorithms. Twenty patients with titanium implants in the spine treated with SBRT without density override (DO) were selected. The clinical plan for each patient was created in Pinnacle and subsequently imported into Eclipse (AAA and AcurosXB) and Raystation (CC) for dose evaluation with and without DO to the titanium implant. We renormalized all plans such that 90% of the tumor volume received the prescription dose and subsequently evaluated the following dose metrics: (1) the maximum dose to 0.03 cc (Dmax), dose to 99% (D99%) and 90% (D90%) of the tumor volume; (2) Dmax and volumetric metrics of the spinal cord. For the same algorithm, plans with and without DO had similar dose distributions. Differences in Dmax, D99% and D90% of the tumor were on average &lt;2% with slightly larger variations up to 5.58% in Dmax using AcurosXB. Dmax of the spinal cord for plans calculated with DO increased but the differences were clinically insignificant for all algorithms (mean: 0.36% ± 0.7%). Comparing to the clinical plans, the relative differences for all algorithms had an average of 1.73% (-10.36%-13.21%) for the tumor metrics and -0.93% (-9.87%-10.95%) for Dmax of the spinal cord. A few cases with small tumor and spinal cord volumes, dose differences of &gt;10% in both D99% and Dmax of the tumor, and Dmax of the spinal cord were observed. For all algorithms, the presence of titanium implants in the spine for most patients had minimal impact on dose distributions with and without DO. For the same plan calculated with different algorithms, larger differences in volumetric metrics of &gt;10% could be observed, impacted by dose gradient at the plan normalization volume, tumor volumes, plan complexity, and partial voxel volume interpolation.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1526-9914</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-9914</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/acm2.14070</identifier><identifier>PMID: 37540084</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Patients ; Planning ; Prostheses ; Radiation Oncology Physics ; Radiation therapy ; Spinal cord ; Titanium ; Titanium alloys ; Transplants &amp; implants</subject><ispartof>Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 2023-10, Vol.24 (10), p.e14070-e14070</ispartof><rights>2023 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc.</rights><rights>2023. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2023 The Authors. published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-d3992c3adf17985e2d3cbda991ddf0726d40fc15a2773b843f215d5fc464e6963</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-d3992c3adf17985e2d3cbda991ddf0726d40fc15a2773b843f215d5fc464e6963</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10562029/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10562029/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37540084$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Liu, Chieh-Wen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Young-Bin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magnelli, Anthony</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Angelov, Lilyana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balagamwala, Ehsan H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chao, Samuel T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xia, Ping</creatorcontrib><title>The dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spinal SBRT using four commercial treatment planning algorithms</title><title>Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics</title><addtitle>J Appl Clin Med Phys</addtitle><description>To evaluate the dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spine SBRT using four dose calculation algorithms. Twenty patients with titanium implants in the spine treated with SBRT without density override (DO) were selected. The clinical plan for each patient was created in Pinnacle and subsequently imported into Eclipse (AAA and AcurosXB) and Raystation (CC) for dose evaluation with and without DO to the titanium implant. We renormalized all plans such that 90% of the tumor volume received the prescription dose and subsequently evaluated the following dose metrics: (1) the maximum dose to 0.03 cc (Dmax), dose to 99% (D99%) and 90% (D90%) of the tumor volume; (2) Dmax and volumetric metrics of the spinal cord. For the same algorithm, plans with and without DO had similar dose distributions. Differences in Dmax, D99% and D90% of the tumor were on average &lt;2% with slightly larger variations up to 5.58% in Dmax using AcurosXB. Dmax of the spinal cord for plans calculated with DO increased but the differences were clinically insignificant for all algorithms (mean: 0.36% ± 0.7%). Comparing to the clinical plans, the relative differences for all algorithms had an average of 1.73% (-10.36%-13.21%) for the tumor metrics and -0.93% (-9.87%-10.95%) for Dmax of the spinal cord. A few cases with small tumor and spinal cord volumes, dose differences of &gt;10% in both D99% and Dmax of the tumor, and Dmax of the spinal cord were observed. For all algorithms, the presence of titanium implants in the spine for most patients had minimal impact on dose distributions with and without DO. For the same plan calculated with different algorithms, larger differences in volumetric metrics of &gt;10% could be observed, impacted by dose gradient at the plan normalization volume, tumor volumes, plan complexity, and partial voxel volume interpolation.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Planning</subject><subject>Prostheses</subject><subject>Radiation Oncology Physics</subject><subject>Radiation therapy</subject><subject>Spinal cord</subject><subject>Titanium</subject><subject>Titanium alloys</subject><subject>Transplants &amp; implants</subject><issn>1526-9914</issn><issn>1526-9914</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkVtrFDEUx0OxtLX2xQ8gAV9E2DW3mUyepBZ7gYKg2-eQzWU3ZZKsSabgtzfj1tKWPJxwzu9c_wC8x2iJESJflA5kiRni6ACc4I70CyEwe_PsfwzelnKPEMYDHY7AMeUdQ2hgJyCsthaaVHywNXsNfdgpXWFysPqqop_C7BpVrAX6CMvORzXCX99-ruBUfNxAl6YMdQrBZu1bqGararCxwjkrzogaNyn7ug3lHTh0aiz27NGegrvL76uL68Xtj6ubi_PbhWac1YWhQhBNlXGYi6GzxFC9NqptYoxDnPSGIadxpwjndD0w6gjuTOc065ntRU9Pwdd93d20DtboNk5Wo9xlH1T-I5Py8mUk-q3cpAeJUdcTRESr8OmxQk6_J1uqDL5oO7adbJqKJAPrBREDnpt9fIXet5u0M80UZ93AKaeNWu6pjRqt9NGl1li3Z2zwOkXrfPOfc4F6ijFlLeHzPkHnVEq27ml8jOSsu5x1l_90b_CH5ws_of-Fpn8BIHGqKA</recordid><startdate>20231001</startdate><enddate>20231001</enddate><creator>Liu, Chieh-Wen</creator><creator>Cho, Young-Bin</creator><creator>Magnelli, Anthony</creator><creator>Angelov, Lilyana</creator><creator>Balagamwala, Ehsan H</creator><creator>Chao, Samuel T</creator><creator>Xia, Ping</creator><general>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</general><general>John Wiley and Sons Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IAO</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20231001</creationdate><title>The dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spinal SBRT using four commercial treatment planning algorithms</title><author>Liu, Chieh-Wen ; Cho, Young-Bin ; Magnelli, Anthony ; Angelov, Lilyana ; Balagamwala, Ehsan H ; Chao, Samuel T ; Xia, Ping</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-d3992c3adf17985e2d3cbda991ddf0726d40fc15a2773b843f215d5fc464e6963</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Planning</topic><topic>Prostheses</topic><topic>Radiation Oncology Physics</topic><topic>Radiation therapy</topic><topic>Spinal cord</topic><topic>Titanium</topic><topic>Titanium alloys</topic><topic>Transplants &amp; implants</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Liu, Chieh-Wen</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Young-Bin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Magnelli, Anthony</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Angelov, Lilyana</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Balagamwala, Ehsan H</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chao, Samuel T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Xia, Ping</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale Academic OneFile</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Liu, Chieh-Wen</au><au>Cho, Young-Bin</au><au>Magnelli, Anthony</au><au>Angelov, Lilyana</au><au>Balagamwala, Ehsan H</au><au>Chao, Samuel T</au><au>Xia, Ping</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spinal SBRT using four commercial treatment planning algorithms</atitle><jtitle>Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics</jtitle><addtitle>J Appl Clin Med Phys</addtitle><date>2023-10-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>24</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>e14070</spage><epage>e14070</epage><pages>e14070-e14070</pages><issn>1526-9914</issn><eissn>1526-9914</eissn><abstract>To evaluate the dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spine SBRT using four dose calculation algorithms. Twenty patients with titanium implants in the spine treated with SBRT without density override (DO) were selected. The clinical plan for each patient was created in Pinnacle and subsequently imported into Eclipse (AAA and AcurosXB) and Raystation (CC) for dose evaluation with and without DO to the titanium implant. We renormalized all plans such that 90% of the tumor volume received the prescription dose and subsequently evaluated the following dose metrics: (1) the maximum dose to 0.03 cc (Dmax), dose to 99% (D99%) and 90% (D90%) of the tumor volume; (2) Dmax and volumetric metrics of the spinal cord. For the same algorithm, plans with and without DO had similar dose distributions. Differences in Dmax, D99% and D90% of the tumor were on average &lt;2% with slightly larger variations up to 5.58% in Dmax using AcurosXB. Dmax of the spinal cord for plans calculated with DO increased but the differences were clinically insignificant for all algorithms (mean: 0.36% ± 0.7%). Comparing to the clinical plans, the relative differences for all algorithms had an average of 1.73% (-10.36%-13.21%) for the tumor metrics and -0.93% (-9.87%-10.95%) for Dmax of the spinal cord. A few cases with small tumor and spinal cord volumes, dose differences of &gt;10% in both D99% and Dmax of the tumor, and Dmax of the spinal cord were observed. For all algorithms, the presence of titanium implants in the spine for most patients had minimal impact on dose distributions with and without DO. For the same plan calculated with different algorithms, larger differences in volumetric metrics of &gt;10% could be observed, impacted by dose gradient at the plan normalization volume, tumor volumes, plan complexity, and partial voxel volume interpolation.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>John Wiley &amp; Sons, Inc</pub><pmid>37540084</pmid><doi>10.1002/acm2.14070</doi><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1526-9914
ispartof Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 2023-10, Vol.24 (10), p.e14070-e14070
issn 1526-9914
1526-9914
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10562029
source Wiley Journals; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection); PubMed Central
subjects Algorithms
Patients
Planning
Prostheses
Radiation Oncology Physics
Radiation therapy
Spinal cord
Titanium
Titanium alloys
Transplants & implants
title The dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spinal SBRT using four commercial treatment planning algorithms
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T14%3A33%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20dosimetric%20impact%20of%20titanium%20implants%20in%20spinal%20SBRT%20using%20four%20commercial%20treatment%20planning%20algorithms&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20Applied%20Clinical%20Medical%20Physics&rft.au=Liu,%20Chieh-Wen&rft.date=2023-10-01&rft.volume=24&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=e14070&rft.epage=e14070&rft.pages=e14070-e14070&rft.issn=1526-9914&rft.eissn=1526-9914&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/acm2.14070&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA790631134%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2874587373&rft_id=info:pmid/37540084&rft_galeid=A790631134&rfr_iscdi=true