Which center to go to for Gamma Knife

[edhayes]

I have had GREAT experiences talking to the people at NYU and UVa. 
Dr. Golfinos at NYU and Dr. Sheehan at UVa are both wonderful people.
My question is at NYU they have an older Leksell Gamma Knife machine (which is being replaced in the fall of this year) where as UVa has the Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion which is supposed to be "better" and maybe more accurate.
The accuracy part of the equation seems to be the area where there can be some debate over.
It could be that that the Leksell Gamma Knife Perfexion is just easier to use and not actually more accurate.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this??

Thanks

Edmund
1.3 x 0.6cm AN diagnosed 2/1/08

[PrisB_NJ]

Hi Edmund, I also posted a similar question last week but was referred to the cyber-knife site since this is a pretty technical issue.
I saw Dr. Golfinos in January and liked him very much but had concerns about the GK installation.  I believe NYU has a model 4 which was installed in 1997 from what I can glean from the web and is actually owned by US Neurosurgical. The 4 model is designed for a small patient caseload. The 4C model was developed later and this has the APS (Automatic Positioning System).  Perfexion is the latest model.  This info is from the Leskell site www.elekta.com.  Do you know if NYU has the 4 or 4C model?  I am also sending my MRI to the U of Pittsburgh - Dr. Kondziolka  - since this appears to be the most experienced center for GK and it is in driving distance.

By the way, I see from your site that you are a PharmD.  I was a registered Pharmacist many years ago In hospital pharmacy (e.g., Mount Sinai in NYC) but left to work for IBM.  I am still getting head hunters calling me with openings since I am still maintaining my registration in CT via continuing education. Would be interested if you find out any other information on the GK model.  Thanks.

[sgerrard]

Hi Ed,

I took a look at the website on the Perfexion - nice videos! Besides various nice-to-have features, it has a more flexible beam positioning system, which is computer controlled. This would allow them more flexibility in the treatment plan, because they can move the beams a little without moving you. In theory, that would mean even less chance of hitting the hearing nerve, or whatever else they are trying to miss. I don't know of any data that would indicate how much difference it makes for AN treatment.

One of the reasons they developed it, and a hospital might acquire it, is that the flexibility means it can treat more kinds of tumors, in more locations. It is also faster, apparently, so they can do more patients per day. I don't know if any of that makes the treatment of your AN any better though. My guess is that it is probably not much of a difference. The standard GK machine is pretty well dialed in for AN treatments.

Steve