Pica, Alessia; Malthaner, Marco; Aebersold, Daniel; Raabe, Andreas; Beck, Jürgen; Caversaccio, Marco; Vibert-Mennet, Dominique; Krähenbühl, Anna; Manser, Peter; Schmidhalter, Daniel (June 2013). Frameless linac-based (Novalis TX) stereotactic treatment for vestibular schwannoma that extend distally into the iac (Internal Acoustic Canal): an analysis of the dose to the cochlea. Journal of radiosurgery & SBRT, 2(Suppl. 2.1), pp. 55-56. Old City Publ.
Objectives: We compare the dose parameters between 3 different radiosurgery delivery techniques which may have an impact on cochlea function. Methods: Five patients with unilateral vestibular schwannoma (VS) were selected for this study. Planning procedure was carried out using the BrainLAB® iPlan planning system v. 4.5. For each patient three different planning techniques were used: dynamic arc (DA) with 5 arcs per plan, hybrid arc (HA) with 5 arcs per plan and IMRT with 8 fields per plan. For each technique, two plans were generated with different methods: with the first method (PTV coverage) it was the goal to fully cover the PTV with at least 12 Gy (normalization: 12 Gy covered 99% of the PTV) and with the second method (cochlea sparing) it was the goal to spare the cochlea (normalization: 12 Gy covers 50% of the PTV/V4Gy of cochlea lower than 1%). Plan evaluation was done considering target volume and coverage (conformity and homogeneity) and OAR constraints (mean (Dmean) and maximum dose (Dmax) to cochlea, Dmax to brainstem and cochlea). The total number of monitor units (MU) was analyzed. Results: The median tumor volume was 0.95 cm³ (range, 0.86-3 cm³). The median PTV was 1.44 cm³ (range, 1-3.5 cm³). The median distance between the tumor and the cochlea's modiulus was 2.7 mm (range, 1.8-6.3 mm). For the PTV coverage method, when we compared the cochlear dose in VS patients planned with DA, HA and IMRT, there were no significant differences in Dmax (p = 0.872) and in Dmean (p= 0.860). We found a significant correlation (p< 0.05) between the target volume and the cochlear Dmean for all plans with Pearson's coefficient correlation of 0.90, 0.92 and 0.94 for the DA, HA and IMRT techniques, respectively. For the cochlea sparing method, when we compared the cochlear dose in VS patients planned with DA, HA and IMRT, there were no significant differences in Dmax (p = 0.310) and in Dmean (p= 0.275). However, in this group the V4Gy of the ipsilateral cochlea represents less than 1%. When using the HA or IMRT technique, the homogeneity and conformity in the PTV, but also the number of MUs were increased in comparison to the DA technique. Conclusion: VS tumors that extend distally into the IAC had an equivalent sparing of cochlea with DA approach compared with the HA and IMRT techniques. Disclosure: No significant relationships.
Actions (login required)
 |
Edit item |