J Med Phys Close
 

Figure 12: A comparison of IMRT with conformal (CRT) techniques [adapted from Wang and Xu (2008)].[45] The subplot is a ratio plot of the 6-field CRT and IMRT deliveries compared to the 4-field CRT delivery (monitor units were 1260, 1308 and 2850, respectively). Difference between achieving a 14×14-cm2 field with a static MLC or with a sliding-window technique [adapted from Sharma et al. (2006a)].[39] The subplot shows the ratio of the sliding-window case to the static case; achieving an equivalent field with the sliding window generates up to an order of magnitude more out-of-field dose

Figure 12: A comparison of IMRT with conformal (CRT) techniques [adapted from Wang and Xu (2008)].<sup>[45]</sup> The subplot is a ratio plot of the 6-field CRT and IMRT deliveries compared to the 4-field CRT delivery (monitor units were 1260, 1308 and 2850, respectively). Difference between achieving a 14×14-cm<sup>2</sup> field with a static MLC or with a sliding-window technique [adapted from Sharma et al. (2006a)].<sup>[39]</sup> The subplot shows the ratio of the sliding-window case to the static case; achieving an equivalent field with the sliding window generates up to an order of magnitude more out-of-field dose