Single-fraction stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) is a highly used tool in managing brain metastases, alongside its multifraction counterpart – stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). These radiation therapy techniques have been associated with excellent clinical outcomes, such as decreased local recurrence, increased survival, and improved palliative effects. However, present literature concerning the cost-effectiveness of these techniques remain scarce. Based on the current procedure terminology codes involving services provided during radiation consultation, treatment, and follow-up in our institution, 3-fraction SBRT with a 3-dimensional plan and intensity modulated radiation therapy cost 27% and 17% more than SRS, respectively. A 32% and 34% price increase can, respectively, be seen in 5-fraction SBRT with 3-dimensional plan and intensity modulated radiation therapy delivery sessions relative to 3-fraction SBRT administration. Cost savings between these procedures were associated with the radiation therapy delivery sessions instead of the treatment planning process. These analyses indicate that SRS appears to be a less expensive and time-intensive option than SBRT in our institution. However, additional comparative analyses regarding SRS and SBRT are needed to explore the clinical and financial benefits of these radiation therapy techniques.

单次立体定向放射外科 (SRS) 是管理脑转移的常用工具，与其对应的多次立体定向放射治疗 (SBRT) 一样。这些放射治疗技术与出色的临床结果相关，例如减少局部复发、增加存活率和改善姑息治疗效果。然而，目前关于这些技术成本效益的文献仍然很少。根据我们机构目前涉及放射咨询、治疗和随访期间提供的服务的程序术语代码，具有三维计划的 3 次 SBRT 和调强放射治疗的成本分别比 SRS 高 27% 和 17% . 价格分别上涨 32% 和 34%，相对于 3 部分 SBRT 给药，在 5 部分 SBRT 中可以看到具有 3 维计划和强度调制的放射治疗递送会话。这些程序之间的成本节省与放射治疗交付会话而不是治疗计划过程相关。这些分析表明，在我们的机构中​​，SRS 似乎是比 SBRT 更便宜且耗时的选择。然而，需要对 SRS 和 SBRT 进行额外的比较分析，以探索这些放射治疗技术的临床和经济利益。这些分析表明，在我们的机构中​​，SRS 似乎是比 SBRT 更便宜且耗时的选择。然而，需要对 SRS 和 SBRT 进行额外的比较分析，以探索这些放射治疗技术的临床和经济利益。这些分析表明，在我们的机构中​​，SRS 似乎是比 SBRT 更便宜且耗时的选择。然而，需要对 SRS 和 SBRT 进行额外的比较分析，以探索这些放射治疗技术的临床和经济利益。