Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/10316/97203
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorVentura, Tiago-
dc.contributor.authorRocha, Humberto-
dc.contributor.authorda Costa Ferreira, Brigida-
dc.contributor.authorDias, Joana-
dc.contributor.authordo Carmo Lopes, Maria-
dc.date.accessioned2022-01-19T12:02:36Z-
dc.date.available2022-01-19T12:02:36Z-
dc.date.issued2021-12-
dc.identifier.issn2662-4729pt
dc.identifier.issn2662-4737pt
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10316/97203-
dc.description.abstractTwo methods for non-coplanar beam direction optimization, one for static beams and another for arc trajectories, were proposed for intracranial tumours. The results of the beam angle optimizations were compared with the beam directions used in the clinical plans. Ten meningioma cases already treated were selected for this retrospective planning study. Algorithms for non-coplanar beam angle optimization (BAO) and arc trajectory optimization (ATO) were used to generate the corresponding plans. A plan quality score, calculated by a graphical method for plan assessment and comparison, was used to guide the beam angle optimization process. For each patient, the clinical plans (CLIN), created with the static beam orientations used for treatment, and coplanar VMAT approximated plans (VMAT) were also generated. To make fair plan comparisons, all plan optimizations were performed in an automated multicriteria calculation engine and the dosimetric plan quality was assessed. BAO and ATO plans presented, on average, moderate global plan score improvements over VMAT and CLIN plans. Nevertheless, while BAO and CLIN plans assured a more efficient OARs sparing, the ATO and VMAT plans presented a higher coverage and conformity of the PTV. Globally, all plans presented high-quality dose distributions. No statistically significant quality differences were found, on average, between BAO, ATO and CLIN plans. However, automated plan solution optimizations (BAO or ATO) may improve plan generation efficiency and standardization. In some individual patients, plan quality improvements were achieved with ATO plans, demonstrating the possible benefits of this automated optimized delivery technique.pt
dc.language.isoengpt
dc.publisherSpringer Naturept
dc.relationUIDB/00308/2020pt
dc.relationUIDB/05037/2020pt
dc.relationPOCI-01-0145- FEDER-028030pt
dc.rightsopenAccesspt
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/pt
dc.subjectArc trajectory; Beam angle optimization; Non-coplanar; VMATpt
dc.subject.meshHumanspt
dc.subject.meshRadiotherapy Dosagept
dc.subject.meshRadiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assistedpt
dc.subject.meshRetrospective Studiespt
dc.subject.meshMeningeal Neoplasmspt
dc.subject.meshMeningiomapt
dc.subject.meshRadiotherapy, Intensity-Modulatedpt
dc.titleComparison of non-coplanar optimization of static beams and arc trajectories for intensity-modulated treatments of meningioma casespt
dc.typearticle-
degois.publication.firstPage1273-1283pt
degois.publication.lastPage1283pt
degois.publication.issue4pt
degois.publication.titlePhysical and Engineering Sciences in Medicinept
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13246-021-01061-8pt
dc.peerreviewedyespt
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s13246-021-01061-8pt
degois.publication.volume44pt
dc.date.embargo2021-12-01*
uc.date.periodoEmbargo0pt
item.openairetypearticle-
item.languageiso639-1en-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.grantfulltextopen-
item.fulltextCom Texto completo-
crisitem.author.researchunitINESC Coimbra – Institute for Systems Engineering and Computers at Coimbra-
crisitem.author.researchunitINESC Coimbra – Institute for Systems Engineering and Computers at Coimbra-
crisitem.author.researchunitCeBER – Centre for Business and Economics Research-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0003-1562-0387-
crisitem.author.orcid0000-0002-5981-4469-
Appears in Collections:I&D CeBER - Artigos em Revistas Internacionais
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat
2021_PESM.pdf947.24 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

90
checked on Mar 26, 2024

Download(s)

33
checked on Mar 26, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric

Altmetric


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons