Skip to main content
Log in

Dosimetric comparison of stereotactic body radiotherapy for spinal metastasis in cyberknife and helical tomotherapy

  • Published:
Journal of the Korean Physical Society Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study seeks to evaluate the stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) dosimetric benefit of cyberknife (CK) and helical tomotherapy (HT) for spinal tumor patients in regards to successful plan acceptance and lower dosage to critical structures. This study used dose volume histogram (DVH) compared the two systems quantitatively, by using several indices for the dosimetric comparisons, including the conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) for the planned target volume (PTV). We planned L3 (n = 2), L5 (n = 1), T12 (n = 1), C3 (n = 1), and T5 (n = 1) spinal tumors case with planning target volumes ranging from 3.55–17.95 cc. Prescription doses were 1600 ∼ 2000 cGy per single fraction. CK prescribed 80 ∼ 85% in PTV and HT 90 ∼ 95%, respectively. The dosimetric data were compared between the two treatment systems by calculating the CI, HI, and maximum doses to the OARs based on the treatment plans, generated for each site. Regarding the homogeneity of PTV, both plans gave satisfactory results, and no significant differences were observed. The partial volume tolerance dose (received dose of 10 Gy at a spinal cord volume 10%) to the spinal cord in 16 ∼ 18 Gy single fraction was satisfactory. We found that both planning systems satisfied the required PTV prescription, but better dose conformity and better dose homogeneity with a poorer dose gradient were achieved with HT then with CK.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. M. Foote, J. Clin. Neurosci. 18, 276 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. A. Sahgal, Int. J. Radiat. 74, 723 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. A. Sahgal et al., Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 71, 652 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. S. H. Benedict, K. M. Yenice and D. Followill, Med. Phys. 37, 4078 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. T. R. Mackie, Phys. Med. Biol. 51, 427 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. V. M. Vulpen, C. Field and C. P. J. Raaijmakers, Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 62, 1535 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. N. Dunlap et al., Med. Dosim. 35, 312 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. E. T. Soisson et al., Med. Dosim. 36, 45 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  9. A. muacevic et al., J. Neurosurg. Spine. 5, 303 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. T. F. Lee et al., Med. Dosim. 36, 62 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. M. Poppe et al., Med. Dosim. 36, 351 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. G. J. Gagnon et al., Cancer 110, 1796 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Byung Ock Choi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kang, Yn., Kay, C.S., Son, S.H. et al. Dosimetric comparison of stereotactic body radiotherapy for spinal metastasis in cyberknife and helical tomotherapy. Journal of the Korean Physical Society 61, 2049–2053 (2012). https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.61.2049

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.3938/jkps.61.2049

Keywords

Navigation