论文标题

一项关于伽马刀放射外科手术的计划质量的机构研究以及前庭schwannoma的手动远期计划

An institutional study on plan quality and variation of manual forward planning for Gamma Knife radiosurgery for vestibular schwannoma

论文作者

Tian, Zhen, Wang, Tonghe, Yang, Xiaofeng, Giles, Matt D., Butker, Elizabeth, Walb, Matthew C., Liu, Tian, Kahn, Shannon

论文摘要

由于伽玛刀(GK)手动远期计划的复杂性和笨拙性,因此由此产生的治疗计划的质量在很大程度上取决于计划者的技能,经验和致力于计划开发的努力。因此,在机构和计划者之间,甚至在不同情况下,GK计划质量可能会有很大差异。对于具有复杂几何形状(例如前庭造型瘤病例)的挑战性病例,这尤其关注。这项回顾性研究的目的是调查计划质量以及手动远期计划的,临床上可接受的GK治疗计划的差异,该计划对22例先前的前庭造型症病例。考虑到GK计划中计划目标中不同的患者几何形状和不同权衡的影响,很难客观地评估不同情况下的计划质量。为了减少计划质量评估的这些混杂因素,我们采用了最近开发的多分辨率倒数级别计划算法来为每种情况生成一个黄金计划,预计该计划将在帕累托表面上或与手动计划中使用类似的权衡取舍。然后,手动计划的计划质量会根据其偏离黄金计划的偏差来量化。 0-100之间的评分标准旨在计算每个手动计划的最终分数,以简化我们的分析。在这22例病例中观察到了较大的质量变化,其中两例得分低于75,三例得分在80到85之间,两例在85至90之间,八个病例在90至95之间,七个病例和7例高于95的病例。 GK手动计划中这种巨大的差异值得引起人们的关注,并值得进一步研究如何降低GK治疗计划质量的变化。

Due to the complexity and cumbersomeness of Gamma Knife (GK) manual forward planning, the quality of the resulting treatment plans heavily depends on the planners skill, experience and the amount of effort devoted to plan development. Hence, GK plan quality may vary significantly among institutions and planners, and even for a same planner at different cases. This is particularly a concern for challenging cases with complicated geometry, such as vestibular schwannoma cases. The purpose of this retrospective study is to investigate the plan quality and variation in the manually forward planned, clinically acceptable GK treatment plans of 22 previous vestibular schwannoma cases. Considering the impacts of different patient geometry and different trade-offs among the planning objectives in GK planning, it is difficult to objectively assess the plan quality across different cases. To reduce these confounding factors on plan quality assessment, we employed our recently developed multiresolution-level inverse planning algorithm to generate a golden plan for each case, which is expected to be on or close to the pareto surface with a similar trade-off as used in the manual plan. The plan quality of the manual plan is then quantified in terms of its deviation from the golden plan. A scoring criterion between 0-100 was designed to calculate a final score for each manual plan to simplify our analysis. Large quality variation was observed in these 22 cases, with two cases having a score lower than 75, three cases scoring between 80 and 85, two cases between 85 and 90, eight cases between 90 and 95, and seven cases higher than 95. Inter- and intra- planner variability was also observed in our study. This large variation in GK manual planning deserves high attention, and merits further investigation on how to reduce the variation in GK treatment plan quality.

扫码加入交流群

加入微信交流群

微信交流群二维码

扫码加入学术交流群,获取更多资源