Linear accelerator radiosurgery at the University of Florida.
The University of Florida radiosurgical project began in 1986 with the following design criteria: the most accurate radiosurgical device possible, state-of-the-art computer hardware and software for dose planning, and a number of collimators sufficient to treat any lesion homogeneously. In this article we have reviewed how these goals have been met. Physical aspects of this device (accuracy, dose gradient, and dose-planning speed) as well as clinical results compare favorably with any other radiosurgical experience. We believe that LINAC radiosurgical systems are advantageous in terms of cost, variety of collimator sizes available, and currently available sophistication of computerized dose planning. In the near future, the development of conformal treatment may significantly change the entire field of radiosurgery by offering heretofore unobtainable dose plans for irregularly shaped lesions. In addition, LINAC systems may be adapted for stereotactically focused fractionated radiation therapy and for radiosurgical treatment of lesions elsewhere in the body. Accuracy and computer sophistication notwithstanding, we cannot emphasize strongly enough our belief that the least important determinant of radiosurgical results is the machine used to deliver the radiation. It is absolutely vital that all groups undertaking radiosurgery include neurosurgeons, radiation physicists, and radiation therapists who have spent considerable time studying and learning the myriad details necessary to produce consistently good results. All radiosurgical patients must be followed up carefully and studied so that we can learn how to better apply this technique. Only patients who are not candidates for conventional surgery should be treated radiosurgically, at least until much more is known about long-term success and complication rates. A patient never should be treated radiosurgically simply because the referring or treating neurosurgeon is uncomfortable with proven conventional procedures. All groups performing radiosurgery should strive to adhere to the highest possible standards. We are all responsible for verifying the adequacy of our radiosurgical systems. We are all responsible for selecting our patients well, treating them with a team approach that applies the latest available knowledge of our field, following up closely, and reporting our results honestly and thoroughly so that all can benefit. We owe this, at least, to our patients and to neurosurgery.
Friedman
W A
WA
Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Florida, Gainesville.
Bova
F J
FJ
Spiegelmann
R
R
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D000818:Animals; D001932:Brain Neoplasms / Q000556:secondary / Q000601:surgery*; D003199:Computer Systems; D004867:Equipment Design; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D002538:Intracranial Arteriovenous Malformations / Q000601:surgery*; D008297:Male; D008577:Meningeal Neoplasms / Q000601:surgery; D008579:Meningioma / Q000601:surgery; D008875:Middle Aged; D009464:Neuroma, Acoustic / Q000601:surgery; D010315:Particle Accelerators; D016634:Radiosurgery / Q000295:instrumentation*; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000295:instrumentation*; D013238:Stereotaxic Techniques / Q000295:instrumentation*