Table 3.
A part of the dosimetric comparison for patient #1 between ERVO, ERSO, and REAS methods with time budget set to 5–25 min/fx. The averages of delivery time were computed on all delivery time budgets in the range with 1 min/fx spacing.
| Time budget | Achieved | Bladder | Sigmoid | Rectum | Delivery | Azimuthal emission | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (min/fx) | D90 (Gy) | D2cc (Gy) | D2cc (Gy) | D2cc (Gy) | time (min/fx) | angle Δφ (deg) | |
| 5 | ERVO | 85.42 | 88.10 | 52.55 | 70.59 | 5.00 | 303.75 |
| ERSO | 84.82 | 88.46 | 52.59 | 70.07 | 5.00 | 303.75 | |
| REAS | 85.88 | 90.00 | 52.72 | 67.66 | 4.97 | 303.75 | |
| 10 | ERVO | 97.27 | 90.00 | 57.85 | 74.93 | 7.94 | 213.75 |
| ERSO | 93.63 | 90.00 | 56.09 | 74.84 | 6.23 | 270.00 | |
| REAS | 96.99 | 89.04 | 55.40 | 75.00 | 8.36 | 202.50 | |
| 15 | ERVO | 97.56 | 89.93 | 58.51 | 75.00 | 12.50 | 135.00 |
| ERSO | 93.63 | 90.00 | 56.09 | 74.84 | 6.23 | 270.00 | |
| REAS | 97.70 | 90.00 | 56.22 | 74.42 | 14.96 | 112.50 | |
| 20 | ERVO | 101.28 | 89.87 | 57.64 | 75.00 | 17.19 | 101.25 |
| ERSO | 93.86 | 82.26 | 56.22 | 75.00 | 17.94 | 90.00 | |
| REAS | 100.06 | 90.00 | 55.98 | 74.68 | 19.19 | 90.00 | |
| 25 | ERVO | 101.93 | 89.99 | 56.22 | 75.00 | 22.04 | 78.75 |
| ERSO | 94.43 | 83.37 | 55.61 | 75.00 | 23.95 | 67.50 | |
| REAS | 100.06 | 90.00 | 55.98 | 74.68 | 19.19 | 90.00 | |
| Average achieved D90 ERVO: 98.2 Gy, ERSO: 93.3 Gy, REAS: 97.6 Gy | |||||||