Physics Bucharest 2017

Comparison of competing techniques CRT, Standard IMRT, VMAT • IMRT (HT-VMAT) vs conventional CRT → highly conformal dose distributions → improved target volume conformity and OARs sparing → ability to produce inhomogeneous dose distributions → simultaneous delivery of different doses per fraction to separate areas within the target volume • VMAT vs fixed field IMRT → improved delivery efficiency → reduction in MU and treatment delivery time (almost universal finding in all planning studies) → inferior sparing of low dose levels • FFF vs FF → reduced treatment time - highly significant for stereotactic treatments with high doses per fraction - potential advantages for motion management techniques → comparable plan quality and accuracy