Table 3.

RadCalc – Eclipse comparison.

No.	Site	% Discrepancy RadCalc CW	% Discrepancy RadCalc CCW	% Discrepancy RadCalc CW 9 Partial Arcs	% Discrepancy RadCalc CCW 9 Partial Arcs
1.	GYN	‐8.0%	‐9.0%	‐2.1%	‐3.6%
2.	GYN	‐5.9%	‐5.4%	‐4.2%	‐4.2%
3.	Trachea	‐3.7%	‐4.3%	‐	‐
4.	Prostate	‐4.2%	‐5.1%	‐	‐0.7%
5.	Prostate	‐7.4%	‐2.6%	‐1.3%	‐
6.	Prostate	‐3.6%	‐3.5%	‐	‐
7.	Prostate	‐1.2%	‐1.4%	‐	‐
8.	Prostate Bed	‐3.0%	‐5.1%	‐	0%
9.	CD Prostate	‐4.3%	‐7.2%	‐	‐2.6%
10.	GYN	‐3.5%	‐3.7%	‐	‐
11.	Prostate Bed	‐4.0%	‐7.3%	‐	‐0.5%
	Average	‐4.44%	‐4.96%	‐3.19%	‐2.46%
Statistical	Median	‐4.00%	‐5.10%	‐3.60%	‐2.60%
Analysis	STDDEV	1.96%	2.22%	1.15%	1.56%
	Range	$(‐)1.2\%–(‐)8\%$	$(‐)1.4\%–(‐)9\%$	$(‐)1.2\%–(‐)4.2\%$	$(‐)1.4\%–(‐)4.3\%$

The comparison between the RadCalc MUs and the Eclipse MUs for the CW and CCW arcs for all patients studied. When the discrepancy was > 5% the arc was divided into nine partial arcs for a better MU estimation in RadCalc. The agreement was much improved (see last two columns).