EBX / SRT Comparison

Both manufacturers claim their electronic brachytherapy technology is superior to SRT technology

Both manufacturers claim their electronic brachytherapy can penetrate deeper than SRT technology

Both manufacturers claim their electronic brachytherapy emits less radiation to surrounding healthy tissue than SRT technology

Both manufacturers have submitted reports comparing their electronic brachytherapy technology to SRT technology.

 

XOFT COMPARISON TO SRT

XOFT-COMPARISON-TO-SRT

ESTEYA COMPARISON TO SRT

The source to skin distance (SSD) is much greater with SRT which requires higher energy output. Typically, the SRT output is as high as 150kV which is more than double e-brachy. The higher energy output results in a higher skin surface dose. A higher skin surface dose increases the risk of adverse events such as radiation dermatitis and hypo or hyperpigmentation for example. ESTEYA-COMPARISON-TO-SRT

Another important difference is the penumbra with Esteya. At 1.1mm, the surrounding healthy tissue is spared from radiation exposure. The previous gold standard was the Elekta Valencia applicators at 1.9mm and teletherapy has much larger penumbras.

ESTEYA-COMPARISON-TO-SRT-2

Lastly, and possibly the most important is the percent depth dose (PDD). The PDD is much higher with e-brachy, and specifically with Esteya. This simply means the dose doesn’t fall off as fast at greater tissue depths. In theory, microscopic disease is still destroyed when it might otherwise be missed by a treatment with a steeper fall off.