1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
A study of IMRT planning parameters on planning efficiency, delivery efficiency, and plan quality
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.4803460
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/40/6/10.1118/1.4803460
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/40/6/10.1118/1.4803460

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Whole neck IMRT with isodose distribution for case no. 2 with display of high risk PTV 70 and standard risk PTV 56.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

AP LAN field of case no. 8 treated to 56 Gy using match line feathering in 1 cm intervals with four IMRT segments. The rightmost digitally reconstructed radiograph (DRR) is the last segment in which the cord is blocked.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

DVH curves of PRVs and PTVs for case no. 9 for the grid resolution parameter. Notes: (1) medium solid curve represents 2 mm dose/fluence grid, thin solid curve represents 4 mm dose/fluence grid, and dashed curve represents 4 mm dose grid with 2 mm fluence grid, (2) flu., fluence.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Mean (a) and (b) and maximum (c) and (d) percentage dose differences for all PRVs and PTVs with varying MSAP (a) and (c) and MMUP (b) and (d) for all cases. Notes: (1) The max is the max magnitude of plan quality degradation being a negative sign for D20% and D99% and a positive sign for all other structures. (2) Reference taken at 3 MU, 4 cm.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Percentage dose differences averaged over all PRVs and PTVs with varying MMUSAP for all cases. Notes: (1) Only D20% is shown for PTV results due to sign convention. (2) Reference taken at 3 MU, 4 cm.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Treatment delivery time model tested against 33 delivered IMRT plans with calculated times from our model and a modified Li and Xing (Ref. ) model. Notes: (1) The modified Li and Xing (Ref. ) model includes two additional terms for beam-on delay and auto-field-sequence mode delay. (2) Measured times delivered on an Elekta LINAC.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Percentage difference in treatment delivery time, number of segments, and plan MU for the 3 MU, 4 cm reference plan versus plans of varying sizes of MSAP (a) and MMUP (b) for all cases.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Breakdown of trials for each case.

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Summary of diagnosis and plan information for the 11 head and neck cases in this study.

Generic image for table
TABLE III.

ROIs (regions of interest) with expansions and dose goals for all cases.

Generic image for table
TABLE IV.

Inputs, parameters, and outputs for treatment delivery time model.

Generic image for table
TABLE V.

PRV and PTV dose differences for grid resolution parameter.

Generic image for table
TABLE VI.

Planning calculation time and total plan MU for grid resolution parameter.

Generic image for table
TABLE VII.

Delivery time model parameters of an Elekta LINAC compared to vendor specifications.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/40/6/10.1118/1.4803460
2013-05-13
2014-04-21
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: A study of IMRT planning parameters on planning efficiency, delivery efficiency, and plan quality
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/40/6/10.1118/1.4803460
10.1118/1.4803460
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM