Journal of Medical Physics
 Home | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscription | Login  The official journal of AMPI, IOMP and AFOMP      
 Users online: 41  Home  EMail this page Print this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2009  |  Volume : 34  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 12-22

Comparative study of convolution, superposition, and fast superposition algorithms in conventional radiotherapy, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy, and intensity modulated radiotherapy techniques for various sites, done on CMS XIO planning system


Department of Radiation Oncology, Indo-American Cancer Institute and Research Center, Road No:14, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-500 034, Andhra Pradesh, India

Correspondence Address:
K R Muralidhar
Department of Radiation Oncology, Indo-American Cancer Institute and Research Center, Road No:14, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-500 034, Andhra Pradesh
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0971-6203.48716

Rights and Permissions

The aim of this study is to compare the dosimetry results that are obtained by using Convolution, Superposition and Fast Superposition algorithms in Conventional Radiotherapy, Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy (3D-CRT), and Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy (IMRT) for different sites, and to study the suitability of algorithms with respect to site and technique. For each of the Conventional, 3D-CRT, and IMRT techniques, four different sites, namely, Lung, Esophagus, Prostate, and Hypopharynx were analyzed. Treatment plans were created using 6MV Photon beam quality using the CMS XiO (Computerized Medical System, St.Louis, MO) treatment planning system. The maximum percentage of variation recorded between algorithms was 3.7% in case of Ca.Lung, for the IMRT Technique. Statistical analysis was performed by comparing the mean relative difference, Conformity Index, and Homogeneity Index for target structures. The fast superposition algorithm showed excellent results for lung and esophagus cases for all techniques. For the prostate, the superposition algorithm showed better results in all techniques. In the conventional case of the hypopharynx, the convolution algorithm was good. In case of Ca. Lung, Ca Prostate, Ca Esophagus, and Ca Hypopharynx, OARs got more doses with the superposition algorithm; this progressively decreased for fast superposition and convolution algorithms, respectively. According to this study the dosimetric results using different algorithms led to significant variation and therefore care had to be taken while evaluating treatment plans. The choice of a dose calculation algorithm may in certain cases even influence clinical results.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed6609    
    Printed233    
    Emailed7    
    PDF Downloaded768    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 5    

Recommend this journal