首页> 外文期刊>Technology in cancer research & treatment. >Dosimetric Comparison of Robotic and Conventional Linac-Based Stereotactic Lung Irradiation in Early-Stage Lung Cancer
【24h】

Dosimetric Comparison of Robotic and Conventional Linac-Based Stereotactic Lung Irradiation in Early-Stage Lung Cancer

机译:机器人和常规基于直线加速器的立体定向肺照射在早期肺癌中的剂量学比较

获取原文
       

摘要

We aimed to compare dosimetric characteristics of conventional linear accerator-based treatment plans to those created using the robotic CyberKnife? (CK) treatment planning system for patients with early-stage lung cancer. Eight early-stage lung cancer patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using a conventional linac-based (LIN) system were included in this study. New treatment plans were created for the patients with the CK treatment planning system in order to compare the two platforms' dosimetric characteristics. Planning computed tomographies (CT) were obtained in three phases: free-breathing, full exhalation and inhalation. The three GTVs were then added together for internal target volume (ITV) with LIN, whereas no ITV was used for CK. Planning target volumes (PTV) were constituted by adding 5-mm margin to GTV and ITV. Treatment plan was 54 Gy in three fractions. Five-field, seven-field, and dynamic-conformal arc planning techniques were used in LIN plans. Plans were compared according to dose heterogenity (Dmax-maximum dose), volume of 54 Gy (V54) and 27 Gy isodose (V27), conformity index (CI54 and CI27) and lung volumes. PTVs were significantly smaller in CK plans (p = 0.012). Dmax was significantly lower in ARC plans (p = 0.01). Among all plans, CK had significantly tightest isodose shell received 54 Gy and 27 Gy (p = 0.0001). Among LIN plans, V54 was significantly (p = 0.03) smaller in ARC plans; but no difference was observed for V27 values. LIN plans have better plan quality (CI27 and CI54) than CK. No statistically significant difference was observed for lung volumes. CK plans had superior V54 and V27 values compared to LIN plans due to smaller PTV. LIN plans had better CI27 and CI54 values. Advantages of LIN treatment were no neccessity for fiducial marker use, which may cause pneumothorax, and significantly shorter beam-on treatment times. Both CK and LIN methods are suitable for lung SBRT.
机译:我们旨在将传统的基于线性加速器的治疗计划的剂量特征与使用机器人射波刀创建的剂量计划特征进行比较。 (CK)早期肺癌患者的治疗计划系统。八名早期肺癌患者接受了基于常规直线加速器(LINAC)系统的立体定向放射疗法(SBRT)的治疗。使用CK治疗计划系统为患者创建了新的治疗计划,以便比较两个平台的剂量学特征。计划计算机断层扫描(CT)分为三个阶段:自由呼吸,完全呼气和吸入。然后将这三个GTV与LIN一起添加到内部目标体积(ITV)上,而CK不使用ITV。规划目标量(PTV)是通过在GTV和ITV上增加5毫米的边距来构成的。治疗方案为三分之54 Gy。 LIN计划中使用了五场,七场和动态等角弧规划技术。根据剂量异质性(Dmax-最大剂量),54 Gy(V54)和27 Gy等剂量(V27)的体积,合格指数(CI54和CI27)和肺部体积比较计划。在CK计划中,PTV显着较小(p = 0.012)。在ARC计划中,Dmax显着降低(p = 0.01)。在所有计划中,CK的等剂量壳显着最紧,分别接受了54 Gy和27 Gy(p = 0.0001)。在LIN计划中,V54在ARC计划中要小得多(p = 0.03)。但未观察到V27值的差异。 LIN计划的计划质量(CI27和CI54)比CK更好。肺体积没有观察到统计学上的显着差异。由于PTV较小,CK计划的V54和V27值比LIN计划好。 LIN计划具有更好的CI27和CI54值。 LIN治疗的优点是无需使用基准标志物(可能会导致气胸),并且显着缩短放射治疗时间。 CK和LIN方法均适用于肺SBRT。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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