Impact of the Vero4DRT (MHI-TM2000) on the Total Treatment Time in Stereotactic Irradiation
- Corresponding Author:
- Takashi Mizowaki, MD, PhD
Department of Radiation Oncology and Image-Applied Therapy
Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine
54 Kawara-cho, Shogoin, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan
E-mail: [email protected]
Received Date: June 29, 2015 Accepted Date: July 29, 2015 Published Date: July 31, 2015
Citation: Monzen H, Mizowaki T, Yano S, Fujimoto T, Kamomae T, et al. (2015) Impact of the Vero4DRT (MHI-TM2000) on the Total Treatment Time in Stereotactic Irradiation. J Nucl Med Radiat Ther 6:238. doi:10.4172/2155-9619.1000238
Copyright: © 2015 Monzen H, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License; which permits unrestricted use; distribution; and reproduction in any medium; provided the original author and source are credited.
Background:This study compared features of the Vero4DRT system with those of conventional systems, focusing on the total treatment time and patient safety.
Methods: Individual treatment times for brain stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) were compared among the Vero4DRT, Novalis, and Clinac iX systems. The mean total treatment time was calculated by summing the entire time required for the radiation treatment. The total treatment time for both brain SRT and SBRT with non-coplanar fields was markedly shorter with the Vero4DRT system than the others.
Results: For SBRT, the treatment time with the Vero4DRT system was reduced by 40%, compared with the time using a Clinac iX (13.8 vs. 20.3 min). For SRT, the treatment time with Vero4DRT was 20% shorter than with the Novalis system. With Vero4DRT, all treatments were completed within 14 min, with a significant reduction in the kV-image acquisition and image merging times.
Conclusion: The total treatment time using the Vero4DRT system was significantly shorter compared with conventional options in clinical settings; the shorter treatment time also offered the advantages of minimal intrafractional body movement, as well as better patient throughput.