Abstract
Purpose: IMRT and VMAT have been gradually replacing conventional 3D techniques, as they provide improved conformity and organ-sparing effects. This is especially so for the treatment of mediastinal lymphoma where many organs at risk (OARs) are in close proximity to the treatment volume. Although some dosimetric comparison studies have been done, none has provided any definitive conclusions as to which technique is superior. Thus, the aim of this study is to compare the dosimetric outcomes between IMRT and VMAT using 3 different collimator angles– 0°, 45° and 90°.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
