Comparison of multiple static segment and sliding window techniques in prostate radiotherapy

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.contributor.authorInan G.
dc.contributor.authorGül V.
dc.contributor.authorYavaş G.
dc.contributor.authorYavaş Ç.
dc.contributor.authorO?ul R.
dc.date.accessioned2020-03-26T20:19:50Z
dc.date.available2020-03-26T20:19:50Z
dc.date.issued2019
dc.departmentSelçuk Üniversitesien_US
dc.descriptionTurkish Physical Society 35th International Physics Congress, TPS 2019 -- 4 September 2019 through 8 September 2019 -- 155472en_US
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this study is to compare multiple static segment (step and shoot) and sliding window techniques in intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Ten definitive prostate patients were included in this study. For each patients, two different treatment plans were created. Multiple static segment and sliding window techniques were compared doses in the planning tardet volume (PTV), the organ at risk (OAR) volumes including rectum dose (V50, V35, V25, V20 and V10), bladder dose (V50, V35, V25 and V15), femoral heads mean and maksimum doses, homogeneity index (DHI) and the monitor unit counts (MU) for the treatment. Gamma analysis was performed by using portal dosimetry software in 2 and 3 distance to agreement and 2% and 3% dose difference criteria and their algorithms were compared. Coverage of the planning target volume (PTV) was showed similar results for both sliding window and step and shoot IMRT, however significant differences were found critical organ doses and total monitor unit (MU). Rectum and bladder mean doses for the sliding window and step and shoot plans were 43.37±10.89, 40.03±12.61 and 42.62±10.22, 39.20±12 and the mean MUs were 1014 cGy and 867 cGy respectively. Homogeneity index (HI) was 0.038±0.01 and 0.079±0.001 for SW and MSS techniques. When compared the calculated and measured dose distributions images of the gamma analyses the average result 2/2% and 3/3% were 97.46±1.34, 99.63±0.82 and 98.16± 0.27, 99.33±0.17 for both the sliding window and step and shoot techniques respectively. Two techniques allowed more homogeneous dose distributions in PTV. Considering the dose to organs at risk (OAR) and total MU, MSS technique seems to be advantages than the sliding window. SW and MMS techniques showed comparable results with the respect to gamma analysis. © 2019 Author(s).en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1063/1.5135455en_US
dc.identifier.isbn9.78074E+12
dc.identifier.issn0094243Xen_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityN/Aen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.5135455
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12395/38420
dc.identifier.volume2178en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000618879700058en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/Aen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherAmerican Institute of Physics Inc.en_US
dc.relation.ispartofAIP Conference Proceedingsen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryKonferans Öğesi - Uluslararası - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.selcuk20240510_oaigen_US
dc.titleComparison of multiple static segment and sliding window techniques in prostate radiotherapyen_US
dc.typeConference Objecten_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu