<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<journal>
<title>International Journal of Radiation Research</title>
<title_fa>نشریه پرتو پژوه</title_fa>
<short_title>Int J Radiat Res</short_title>
<subject>Basic Sciences</subject>
<web_url>http://ijrr.com</web_url>
<journal_hbi_system_id>79</journal_hbi_system_id>
<journal_hbi_system_user>journal79</journal_hbi_system_user>
<journal_id_issn>2322-3243</journal_id_issn>
<journal_id_issn_online>2345-4229</journal_id_issn_online>
<journal_id_pii></journal_id_pii>
<journal_id_doi>10.61882/ijrr</journal_id_doi>
<journal_id_iranmedex></journal_id_iranmedex>
<journal_id_magiran></journal_id_magiran>
<journal_id_sid></journal_id_sid>
<journal_id_nlai></journal_id_nlai>
<journal_id_science></journal_id_science>
<language>en</language>
<pubdate>
	<type>jalali</type>
	<year>1402</year>
	<month>1</month>
	<day>1</day>
</pubdate>
<pubdate>
	<type>gregorian</type>
	<year>2023</year>
	<month>4</month>
	<day>1</day>
</pubdate>
<volume>21</volume>
<number>2</number>
<publish_type>online</publish_type>
<publish_edition>1</publish_edition>
<article_type>fulltext</article_type>
<articleset>
	<article>


	<language>en</language>
	<article_id_doi></article_id_doi>
	<title_fa></title_fa>
	<title>Comparison of VMAT and IMRT plans for SBRT treatment of multiple liver metastases using a single isocenter</title>
	<subject_fa>Radiation Biology</subject_fa>
	<subject>Radiation Biology</subject>
	<content_type_fa>تحقيق بديع</content_type_fa>
	<content_type>Original Research</content_type>
	<abstract_fa></abstract_fa>
	<abstract>&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:10pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;text-justify:newspaper&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;text-kashida-space:50%&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;line-height:119%&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:#1f497d&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-style:italic&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight:bold&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;Background&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:#1f497d&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight:bold&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;To perform a comparison of the plan quality between volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for multiple liver metastases using single-isocenter stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify;&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size:10pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;text-justify:newspaper&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;text-kashida-space:50%&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;line-height:119%&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:#1f497d&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-style:italic&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight:bold&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;Materials and Methods&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:#1f497d&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight:bold&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;Twenty-one patients who developed two or three adjacent liver metastases were included. For every patient, both VMAT and IMRT plans were replanned respectively for SBRT treatment. Dosimetric parameters, including the mean dose for the planning target volume, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI) and gradient index (GI), were evaluated. Normal tissue sparing was also investigated. Finally, the total delivered monitor units (MUs) for both groups of treatment plans during irradiation were measured and compared. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:#1f497d&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-style:italic&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight:bold&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;Results&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:#1f497d&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight:bold&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;Both groups of treatment plans satisfied normal tissue tolerance and produced clinically accepted dose distributions. The VMAT plans provided higher values of HI and GI as well as similar CI values in comparison with the IMRT plans. In addition, the VMAT plans obtained ultimately a improved mean dose to the target and a reduced dose to the organs at risk. However, there were no statistically significant differences in the V&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:5.9939pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;&lt;sub&gt;7Gy &lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;and D&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:5.9939pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;&lt;sub&gt;700cc&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt; of healthy liver, the mean dose and V&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:5.9939pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;&lt;sub&gt;15Gy&lt;/sub&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt; of the ipsilateral kidney, the mean dose to the stomach, and the maximum dose to the heart between the two groups. Finally, the VMAT plans showed fewer MUs than the IMRT plans. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:#1f497d&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-style:italic&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight:bold&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;Conclusions&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:#1f497d&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-weight:bold&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span lang=&quot;en-US&quot; style=&quot;font-size:9.0pt&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family:Calibri&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;color:black&quot;&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;language:en-US&quot;&gt;The plan quality of single-isocenter VMAT plans is superior to that of IMRT plans for the SBRT treatment of multiple metastatic liver tumors from the perspective of pure physical parameters.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</abstract>
	<keyword_fa></keyword_fa>
	<keyword>liver metastases, SBRT, VMAT, IMRT, plan quality.</keyword>
	<start_page>189</start_page>
	<end_page>194</end_page>
	<web_url>http://ijrr.com/browse.php?a_code=A-10-1-1027&amp;slc_lang=en&amp;sid=1</web_url>


<author_list>
	<author>
	<first_name>L. </first_name>
	<middle_name></middle_name>
	<last_name>Zhu</last_name>
	<suffix></suffix>
	<first_name_fa></first_name_fa>
	<middle_name_fa></middle_name_fa>
	<last_name_fa></last_name_fa>
	<suffix_fa></suffix_fa>
	<email></email>
	<code>7900319475328460025460</code>
	<orcid>7900319475328460025460</orcid>
	<coreauthor>No</coreauthor>
	<affiliation>Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai East Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China </affiliation>
	<affiliation_fa></affiliation_fa>
	 </author>


	<author>
	<first_name>X. </first_name>
	<middle_name></middle_name>
	<last_name>Lu</last_name>
	<suffix></suffix>
	<first_name_fa></first_name_fa>
	<middle_name_fa></middle_name_fa>
	<last_name_fa></last_name_fa>
	<suffix_fa></suffix_fa>
	<email></email>
	<code>7900319475328460025461</code>
	<orcid>7900319475328460025461</orcid>
	<coreauthor>No</coreauthor>
	<affiliation>Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai East Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China </affiliation>
	<affiliation_fa></affiliation_fa>
	 </author>


	<author>
	<first_name>AH. </first_name>
	<middle_name></middle_name>
	<last_name>Wang</last_name>
	<suffix></suffix>
	<first_name_fa></first_name_fa>
	<middle_name_fa></middle_name_fa>
	<last_name_fa></last_name_fa>
	<suffix_fa></suffix_fa>
	<email></email>
	<code>7900319475328460025462</code>
	<orcid>7900319475328460025462</orcid>
	<coreauthor>No</coreauthor>
	<affiliation>Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai East Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China </affiliation>
	<affiliation_fa></affiliation_fa>
	 </author>


	<author>
	<first_name>ZL. </first_name>
	<middle_name></middle_name>
	<last_name>Xiang</last_name>
	<suffix></suffix>
	<first_name_fa></first_name_fa>
	<middle_name_fa></middle_name_fa>
	<last_name_fa></last_name_fa>
	<suffix_fa></suffix_fa>
	<email>xiangzuolinmd@hotmail.com</email>
	<code>7900319475328460025463</code>
	<orcid>7900319475328460025463</orcid>
	<coreauthor>Yes
</coreauthor>
	<affiliation>Department of Radiation Oncology, Shanghai East Hospital, School of Medicine, Tongji University, Shanghai, China </affiliation>
	<affiliation_fa></affiliation_fa>
	 </author>


</author_list>


	</article>
</articleset>
</journal>
