首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics >Wire or coated balloon? Searching for an optimal source for intravascular brachytherapy with β emitters using 32P as an example
【2h】

Wire or coated balloon? Searching for an optimal source for intravascular brachytherapy with β emitters using 32P as an example

机译:电线或涂层气球?以32P为例寻找使用β发射体进行血管内近距离放射治疗的最佳来源

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

This study identifies basic dosimetric differences between two designs for intravascular brachytherapy (IVBT) in current clinical practice and ongoing trials and their clinical implications within beta emitting systems using P‐32 as an example. The two designs are (i) the wire‐type source, where the radioactive source material is confined to a wirelike structure within the vessel lumen, and (ii) the balloon‐surface source, where the radioactive source material is distributed over a surface area (balloon‐wall) which is brought in close proximity with the vessel wall. Using Monte Carlo simulations with the EGS4 code, the target coverage, the influence of centering errors, and the perturbation of the dose distribution caused by metallic stents have been compared. The radial dose fall‐off in the target region was found to be steeper for balloon surface systems compared with wire systems. The inner lumen wall dose for a balloon surface source was 25% higher than that for a wirelike source (2.5 mm vessel diameter). However, the comparably shallower fall‐off from wire‐type systems is very sensitive to centering uncertainties. A 0.5 mm displacement, for example, will cause the dose to change by a factor of 2 at the inner vessel wall and by a factor of 1.8 at the prescription point. It is shown that the interference from metallic stents is more significant for wire‐type systems than it is for balloon‐surface‐type systems, where double the dose variation beyond the stent at the radial prescription distance may occur. Centering uncertainties dominate the dose perturbation effects for wire‐type systems. Balloon‐surface‐type designs show a more predictable dose distribution that features, however, a higher inner vessel surface dose. Since a direct clinical comparison of systems of both types is not likely, these findings should be considered when interpreting clinical results from treatments with either type of source and, possibly, for future source design. © 2003 American College of Medical Physics. PACS number(s): 87.53.–j, 87.90.+y
机译:这项研究以P-32为例,确定了目前临床实践和正在进行的试验中两种血管内近距离放射治疗(IVBT)设计之间的基本剂量学差异以及它们在β发射系统中的临床意义。两种设计是(i)线型放射源,其中放射性源材料被限制在血管腔内的线状结构中;以及(ii)球囊表面放射源,其中放射性源材料分布在整个表面区域上(气球壁)紧贴在容器壁上。使用带有EGS4代码的蒙特卡洛模拟,比较了目标覆盖率,对中误差的影响以及由金属支架引起的剂量分布的扰动。研究发现,与钢丝系统相比,气球表面系统在目标区域的径向剂量下降更为陡峭。球囊表面源的内腔壁剂量比线状源(2.5毫米血管直径)高25%。但是,相对较弱的线型系统下降对中心不确定性非常敏感。例如,0.5 mm的位移将导致剂量在血管内壁处变化2倍,在处方点处变化1.8倍。结果表明,金属支架对金属丝支架的干扰要比对气球表面型支架的干扰更大,在径向处方距离处,金属支架的剂量变化可能超过支架的两倍。中心不确定性主导着线型系统的剂量扰动效应。球囊表面型设计显示出更可预测的剂量分布,但具有更高的内血管表面剂量。由于不可能对这两种类型的系统进行直接的临床比较,因此在解释使用任何一种来源的治疗产生的临床结果时可能应考虑这些发现,并可能用于将来的来源设计。 ©2003美国医学物理学院。 PACS编号:87.53.–j,87.90。+ y

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号