The present report is consistent with findings from assessments by other agencies that the quality of the available evidence on SRS effectiveness in comparison with other types of treatment is limited. There is still no evidence that any one form of SRS is superior over another. There is some indication, from small studies, of similar outcomes from the Gamma Knife (GK) and focused linear acceleration (LUMAC) versions of SRS. There is increasing use of fractionated stereotactic radiotherapy (FSRT) as an alternative or supplement to SRS. There is some indication, from small series, that FSRT may have advantages over SRS in some situations in terms of indcience of complications. A version of SRS, using robotic technology (the Cyberknife), that enables treatment any part of the body is now commercially available and preliminary clinical results have been published. The GK approach is more expensive than that using standard LINAC approaches or FSRT. Costs of using recent developments in LINAC technology are not yet clear. Many journal articles, as well as HTA reports, confirm advice given in earlier AHFMR assessments that excellent quality assurance and placement of SRS in specialized centres are essential.