Abstract
Stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) of multiple brain metastases has evolved over the last 40 years allowing centres to treat an increasing number of brain metastases in a single treatment fraction. HyperArc
planning optimisation technique is one such development that streamlines the treatment of multiple metastases with a single isocentre. Several studies have investigated the plan quality of HyperArc compared to CyberKnife or Gamma Knife, however there are limited number of studies that include all three modalities. It is the aim of this study to provide an assessment of plan quality between the three SRS platforms across ten patients with multiple brain metastases ranging from three to eight metastases per patient. Strict planning workflows were established to avoid bias towards any particular treatment platform. Plan quality was assessed through dose to organs at risk, Paddick conformity index (PCI), gradient index (GI), global efficiency index (G
) and dose to normal brain tissue. Results from this study found mean PCI observed across Gamma Knife plans was significantly lower than HyperArc and CyberKnife. HyperArc plans observed significantly shorter beam-on times which were 10 to 20 times faster than CyberKnife and Gamma Knife plans. Gamma Knife and CyberKnife were found to produce plans with significantly superior GI, global efficiency index and the volume of healthy brain receiving greater than 12 Gy (V12Gy) when compared to HyperArc plans. Lesion volume was seen to influence the relative difference in dose metrics between systems. The study revealed that all three treatment modalities produced high quality plans for the SRS treatment of multiple brain metastases, each with respective benefits and limitations.