首页> 外文期刊>Medical dosimetry: official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists >Volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy in a whole-ventricular irradiation: A planning comparison study
【24h】

Volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy in a whole-ventricular irradiation: A planning comparison study

机译:全室照射中的容积调制弧光疗法与常规固定场强度调制放射疗法:计划比较研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

This study evaluated the dosimetric difference between volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and conventional fixed-field intensity-modulated radiotherapy (cIMRT) in whole-ventricular irradiation. Computed tomography simulation data for 13 patients were acquired to create plans for VMAT and cIMRT. In both plans, the same median dose (100% = 24. Gy) was prescribed to the planning target volume (PTV), which comprised a tumor bed and whole ventricles. During optimization, doses to the normal brain and body were reduced, provided that the dose constraints of the target coverage were satisfied. The dose-volume indices of the PTV, normal brain, and body as well as monitor units were compared between the 2 techniques by using paired t-tests. The results showed no significant difference in the homogeneity index (0.064 vs 0.065; p = 0.824) of the PTV and conformation number (0.78 vs 0.77; p = 0.065) between the 2 techniques. In the normal brain and body, the dose-volume indices showed no significant difference between the 2 techniques, except for an increase in the volume receiving a low dose in VMAT; the absolute volume of the normal brain and body receiving 1. Gy of radiation significantly increased in VMAT by 1.6% and 8.3%, respectively, compared with that in cIMRT (1044 vs 1028. mL for the normal brain and 3079.2 vs 2823.3. mL for the body; p<0.001). The number of monitor units to deliver a 2.0-Gy fraction was significantly reduced in VMAT compared with that in cIMRT (354 vs 873, respectively; p<0.001). In conclusion, VMAT delivers IMRT to complex target volumes such as whole ventricles with fewer monitor units, while maintaining target coverage and conformal isodose distribution comparable to cIMRT; however, in addition to those characteristics, the fact that the volume of the normal brain and body receiving a low dose would increase in VMAT should be considered.
机译:这项研究评估了全室照射中体积调制电弧疗法(VMAT)与常规固定场强度调制放射疗法(cIMRT)之间的剂量差异。获取了13位患者的计算机断层扫描模拟数据,以制定VMAT和cIMRT计划。在这两个计划中,对计划目标体积(PTV)规定了相同的中位剂量(100%= 24. Gy),该目标体积包括肿瘤床和整个心室。在优化过程中,只要满足目标覆盖范围的剂量限制,就可以减少对正常大脑和身体的剂量。通过配对t检验比较了这两种技术之间的PTV,正常大脑,身体以及监测单位的剂量-体积指数。结果表明,两种技术之间,PTV的均一性指数(0.064对0.065; p = 0.824)和构象数(0.78对0.77; p = 0.065)没有显着差异。在正常的大脑和身体中,这两种技术之间的剂量-体积指数没有显着差异,只是接受低剂量的VMAT体积有所增加。与cIMRT相比,VMAT的正常大脑和身体的绝对体积为1. Gy辐射显着增加了1.6%和8.3%(正常大脑为1044 vs 1028.mL,而cIMRT为3079.2 vs 2823.3.mL)。身体; p <0.001)。与cIMRT相比,在VMAT中递送2.0 Gy分数的监控器数量显着减少(分别为354和873; p <0.001)。总而言之,VMAT可以将IMRT运用于复杂的目标体积,例如具有更少监测单元的整个心室,同时保持与cIMRT相当的目标覆盖范围和等形分布。但是,除了这些特征外,还应考虑接受低剂量的正常大脑和身体的体积会增加VMAT的事实。

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