Purpose: To evaluate the relative plan quality of single-isocenter vs. multi-isocenter volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for radiosurgical treatment of multiple central nervous system metastases. Methods and Materials: VMAT plans were created using RapidArc technology for treatment of simulated patients with three brain metastases. The plans consisted of single-arc/single-isocenter, triple-arc (noncoplanar)/single-isocenter, and triple-arc (coplanar)/triple-isocenter configurations. All VMAT plans were normalized to deliver 100% of the 20-Gy prescription dose to all lesions. The plans were evaluated by calculation of Paddick and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group conformity index scores, Paddick gradient index scores, and 12-Gy isodose volumes. Results: All plans were judged clinically acceptable, but differences were observed in the dosimetric parameters, with the use of multiple noncoplanar arcs showing small improvements in the conformity indexes compared with the single-arc/single-isocenter and triple-arc (coplanar)/triple-isocenter plans. Multiple arc plans (triple-arc [noncoplanar]/single-isocenter and triple-arc [coplanar]/triple-isocenter) showed smaller 12-Gy isodose volumes in scenarios involving three metastases spaced closely together, with only small differences noted among all plans involving lesions spaced further apart. Conclusion: Our initial results suggest that single-isocenter VMAT plans can be used to deliver conformity equivalent to that of multiple isocenter VMAT techniques. For targets that are closely spaced, multiple noncoplanar single-isocenter arcs might be required. VMAT radiosurgery for multiple targets using a single isocenter can be efficiently delivered, requiring less than one-half the beam time required for multiple isocenter set ups. VMAT radiosurgery will likely replace multi-isocenter techniques for linear accelerator-based treatment of multiple targets. © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.