Monte Carlo treatment planning for stereotactic radiosurgery

Solberg, Timothy D.; DeMarco, John J.; Holly, F. Eugene; Smathers, James B.; DeSalles, Antonio

doi:10.1016/s0167-8140(98)00065-6

Cited by 53 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The shortcoming of PB algorithms to accurately predict dose in low density media has been described previously 27 , 32 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 . In a recent study of 304 irradiations performed at 221 different institutions, Kry et al (49) observed an overestimate of 4.9% in PB algorithms compared to measurement in the Radiological Physics Center (RPC) thorax phantom used for RTOG credentialing; these results agree favorably with those reported here.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Commissioning and initial stereotactic ablative radiotherapy experience with Vero

Solberg

Medin

Ramirez

et al. 2014

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study is to describe the comprehensive commissioning process and initial clinical performance of the Vero linear accelerator, a new radiotherapy device recently installed at UT Southwestern Medical Center specifically developed for delivery of image‐guided stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR). The Vero system utilizes a ring gantry to integrate a beam delivery platform with image guidance systems. The ring is capable of rotating ± 60° about the vertical axis to facilitate noncoplanar beam arrangements ideal for SABR delivery. The beam delivery platform consists of a 6 MV C‐band linac with a 60 leaf MLC projecting a maximum field size of 15×15 cm2 at isocenter. The Vero planning and delivery systems support a range of treatment techniques, including fixed beam conformal, dynamic conformal arcs, fixed gantry IMRT in either SMLC (step‐and‐shoot) or DMLC (dynamic) delivery, and hybrid arcs, which combines dynamic conformal arcs and fixed beam IMRT delivery. The accelerator and treatment head are mounted on a gimbal mechanism that allows the linac and MLC to pivot in two dimensions for tumor tracking. Two orthogonal kV imaging subsystems built into the ring facilitate both stereoscopic and volumetric (CBCT) image guidance. The system is also equipped with an always‐active electronic portal imaging device (EPID). We present our commissioning process and initial clinical experience focusing on SABR applications with the Vero, including: (1) beam data acquisition; (2) dosimetric commissioning of the treatment planning system, including evaluation of a Monte Carlo algorithm in a specially‐designed anthropomorphic thorax phantom; (3) validation using the Radiological Physics Center thorax, head and neck (IMRT), and spine credentialing phantoms; (4) end‐to‐end evaluation of IGRT localization accuracy; (5) ongoing system performance, including isocenter stability; and (6) clinical SABR applications.PACS number: 87.53.Ly

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 86%

Commissioning and initial stereotactic ablative radiotherapy experience with Vero

Solberg

Medin

Ramirez

et al. 2014

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Comparisons between various dose calculation methods for linac-based SBRT are reported (18)(19)(20). It is recognized that Monte Carlo-based techniques (21) are the most accurate methods of dose calculation available because they model the actual physical processes that lead to dose deposition including secondary electron distributions. In the early years of the CyberKnife Robotic Radiosurgery System, the dose calculation was based entirely on a ray-tracing algorithm with a simple pathlength density correction for heterogeneities, referred to below as effective path length method (EPL).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Planned Dose Distributions Calculated by Monte Carlo and Ray-Trace Algorithms for the Treatment of Lung Tumors With CyberKnife: A Preliminary Study in 33 Patients

Wilcox

Daskalov

Lincoln

et al. 2010

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Since particle transport simulations occur in materials representative of patient media, MC dose calculation engines calculate dose to medium or tissue (D m ) i.e. energy absorbed in a small tissue element divided by the mass of tissue element [10][11][12][13][14][15].…”

Section: Open Access Ijmpceromentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, to the best of our knowledge, the comparative studies for D m and D w using a commercial MC TPS have not been conducted. As MC-calculation algorithms are being introduced into routine clinical practice [22][23][24][25][26], it has become increasingly important to know how much D w and D m differ in order to determine the significance of this conversion for different clinical cases. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the dose differences in target and critical structures for D m -and D w -based spine IMRT plans using a commercial MC TPS.…”

Section: Open Access Ijmpceromentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of Absorbed Dose to Medium and Absorbed Dose to Water for Spine IMRT Plans Using a Commercial Monte Carlo Treatment Planning System

Usmani¹,

Masai²,

Oh³

et al. 2014

IJMPCERO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Monte Carlo treatment planning for stereotactic radiosurgery

Cited by 53 publications

References 19 publications

Commissioning and initial stereotactic ablative radiotherapy experience with Vero

Commissioning and initial stereotactic ablative radiotherapy experience with Vero

Comparison of Planned Dose Distributions Calculated by Monte Carlo and Ray-Trace Algorithms for the Treatment of Lung Tumors With CyberKnife: A Preliminary Study in 33 Patients

Comparison of Absorbed Dose to Medium and Absorbed Dose to Water for Spine IMRT Plans Using a Commercial Monte Carlo Treatment Planning System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About