Publication:
Dosimetric impact of titanium cranioplasty in Gamma Knife radiosurgery: a technical note comparing TMR 10 and convolution algorithms

dc.contributor.departmentSchool of Medicine
dc.contributor.departmentKUH (Koç University Hospital)
dc.contributor.kuauthorAskeroğlu, Mehmet Orbay
dc.contributor.kuauthorYıldırım, Doğu Cihan
dc.contributor.kuauthorDüzkalır, Ali Haluk
dc.contributor.kuauthorPeker, Selçuk
dc.contributor.schoolcollegeinstituteSCHOOL OF MEDICINE
dc.contributor.schoolcollegeinstituteKUH (KOÇ UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL)
dc.date.accessioned2026-07-22T13:08:14Z
dc.date.issued2026
dc.description.abstractTo evaluate the dosimetric impact of a titanium cranioplasty implant in Gamma Knife (GK) radiosurgery by comparing the TMR 10 algorithm with the CT density-corrected Convolution algorithm. Methods Paired pre- and post-cranioplasty CT datasets from a single patient were analyzed. A 3.5 cc virtual target was placed at five locations relative to the titanium hardware. Baseline plans were optimized on the pre-cranioplasty CT using the Convolution algorithm (20 Gy to the 50% isodose line), then transferred to the post-cranioplasty CT via rigid registration and recalculated with both Convolution and TMR 10 without re-optimization. Endpoints included minimum, mean, and maximum dose; Paddick Conformity Index (PCI); and DVH percentiles (D98%, D50%, D2%). Results Plan quality was preserved across all locations and algorithms. Maximum dose (33.3–34.5 Gy) and PCI (0.79–0.82) remained stable. Post-cranioplasty recalculation yielded small increases in minimum point dose (mean + 0.10 Gy) and mean dose (mean + 1.06 Gy). Differences between TMR 10 and Convolution were modest and most pronounced beneath the implant (up to + 0.30 Gy in D50%). Conclusion Titanium cranioplasty caused small, spatially limited dosimetric perturbations in GK radiosurgery, with conformity and coverage metrics remaining largely stable. CT density-corrected Convolution is preferable when targets or critical structures are adjacent to metallic hardware, and dose metrics near the metal-tissue interface warrant careful scrutiny.
dc.description.harvestedfromManual
dc.description.indexedbyPubMed
dc.description.publisherscopeInternational
dc.description.readpublishN/A
dc.description.sponsoredbyTubitakEuN/A
dc.description.versionPublished Version
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ejmp.2026.105903
dc.identifier.eissn1724-191X
dc.identifier.embargoN/A
dc.identifier.issn1120-1797
dc.identifier.pubmed42470847
dc.identifier.urihttp://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2026.105903
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14288/33756
dc.identifier.volume148
dc.keywordsStereotactic radiosurgery
dc.keywordsGamma knife
dc.keywordsTitanium
dc.keywordsCranioplasty
dc.keywordsDose calculation
dc.keywordsAlgorithm
dc.languageeng
dc.publisherElsevier
dc.relation.affiliationKoç University
dc.relation.collectionKoç University Institutional Repository
dc.relation.ispartofPhysica Medica
dc.subjectNeurosurgery
dc.titleDosimetric impact of titanium cranioplasty in Gamma Knife radiosurgery: a technical note comparing TMR 10 and convolution algorithms
dc.typeJournal Article
dspace.entity.typePublication
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublicationd02929e1-2a70-44f0-ae17-7819f587bedd
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublicationf91d21f0-6b13-46ce-939a-db68e4c8d2ab
relation.isOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryd02929e1-2a70-44f0-ae17-7819f587bedd
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication17f2dc8e-6e54-4fa8-b5e0-d6415123a93e
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication055775c9-9efe-43ec-814f-f6d771fa6dee
relation.isParentOrgUnitOfPublication.latestForDiscovery17f2dc8e-6e54-4fa8-b5e0-d6415123a93e

Files