Comparison of static conformal field with multiple noncoplanar arc techniques for stereotactic radiosurgery or stereotactic radiotherapy

Purpose: Compare the use of static conformal fields with the use of multiple noncoplanar arcs for stereotactic radiosurgery or stereotactic radiotherapy treatment of intracranial lesions. Evaluate the efficacy of these treatment techniques to deliver dose distributions comparable to those considered acceptable in current radiotherapy practice. Methods and Materials: A previously treated radiosurgery case of a patient presenting with an irregularly shaped intracranial lesion was selected. Using a three dimensional (3D) treatment-planning system, treatment ment plans using a single isocenter multiple noncoplanar are technique and multiple noncoplanar conformal static fields were generated. Isodose distributions and dose volume histograms (DVHs) were computed for each treatment plan. We required that the 80% (of maximum dose) isodose surface enclose the target volume for all treatment plans. The prescription isodose was set equal to the minimum target isodose. The DVHs were analyzed to evaluate and compare the different treatment plans. Results: The dose distribution in the target volume becomes more uniform as the number of conformal fields increases. The volume of normal tissue receiving low doses (> 10% prescription isodose)increases as the number of static fields increases. The single isocenter multiple are plan treats the greatest volume of normal tissue to low doses, approximately 1.6 times more volume than that treated by four static fields. The volume of normal tissue receiving high (> 90% of prescription isodose) and intermediate (> 50% of prescription isodose) doses decreases by 29 and 22%, respectively, as the number of static fields is increased from four to eight. Increasing the number of static fields to 12 only further reduces the high and intermediate dose volumes by 10 and 6%, respectively. The volume receiving the prescription dose is more than 3.5 times larger than the target volume for all treatment plans. Conclusions: Use of a multiple noncoplanar conformal static field treatment technique can significantly reduce the volume of normal tissue receiving high and intermediate doses compared with a single isocenter multiple are treatment technique, while providing a more uniform dose in the target volume. Close conformation of the prescription isodose to the target volume is not possible using static uniform conformal fields for target shapes lacking an axis of rotational symmetry or plane of mirror symmetry.