首页> 外文期刊>Medical Physics >Comparison of three strategies in management of independent movement of the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes.
【24h】

Comparison of three strategies in management of independent movement of the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes.

机译:比较三种管理前列腺和盆腔淋巴结独立运动的策略。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

PURPOSE: Concurrent irradiation of the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes is technically challenging due to treating one moving target and one immobile target. The purposes of this article are to propose a new management strategy and to compare this strategy to the conventional isocenter shift method and the previously proposed MLC-shifting method. METHODS: To cope with two target volumes (one moving and one immobile), the authors propose a new management strategy referred to as multiple adaptive plans (MAPs). This strategy involves the creation of a pool of plans for a number of potential prostate locations. Without requiring any additional hardware or software, the MAP strategy is to choose a plan from the pool that most closely matches the "prostate position of the day." This position can be determined by dual image registrations: One aligned to the implant markers in the prostate and the other aligned to the pelvic bones. This strategy was clinically implemented for a special patient with high risk prostate cancer and pathologically confirmed positive pelvic lymph nodes, requiring concurrent IMRT treatment of the prostate and pelvic lymph nodes. Because this patient had an abdominal kidney, small planning margins around the both targets were desired. Using 17 daily acquired megavoltage cone beam CTs (CBCTs), three sets of validation plans were calculated to retrospectively evaluate the MAP strategy as well as the isoshifting and MLC-shifting strategies. RESULTS: According to the validation plans, MAP, isoshifting, and MLC-shifting strategies resulted in D95 of the prostate > 95% of the daily dose on 65%, 100%, and 100% treatment days, respectively. Similarly, D95 of the pelvic lymph nodal was > 95% of the daily dose on 100%, 75%, and 94% of treatment days, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: None of the above strategies simultaneously achieved all treatment goals. Among the three strategies, the MLC shifting was most successful. Validation plans based on daily CBCTs are useful to evaluate the effectiveness of the motion management strategies and to provide additional dose guidance if further dose compensation is needed.
机译:目的:同时照射前列腺和盆腔淋巴结在技术上具有挑战性,原因是要治疗一个移动的目标和一个固定的目标。本文的目的是提出一种新的管理策略,并将该策略与常规等角点偏移方法和以前提出的MLC偏移方法进行比较。方法:为了应对两个目标量(一个移动和一个不动),作者提出了一种称为多适应计划(MAP)的新管理策略。该策略涉及为许多潜在的前列腺位置创建计划池。不需要任何其他硬件或软件,MAP策略就是从池中选择与“当天的前列腺位置”最匹配的计划。该位置可以通过双重图像定位来确定:一个对准前列腺中的植入物标记,另一个对准骨盆骨。该策略已针对患有高危前列腺癌且经病理证实为盆腔淋巴结阳性,需要同时进行前列腺癌和盆腔淋巴结的IMRT治疗的特殊患者在临床上实施。由于该患者的腹部是肾脏,因此希望在两个目标周围都保留较小的计划边界。使用17每日获得的兆伏特锥束CT(CBCT),计算了三套验证计划,以回顾性评估MAP策略以及等位移和MLC位移策略。结果:根据验证计划,MAP,等度移位和MLC移位策略分别在65%,100%和100%的治疗日数下导致前列腺D95>日剂量的95%。同样,在100%,75%和94%的治疗日中,盆腔淋巴结的D95分别大于日剂量的95%。结论:以上策略均未同时达到所有治疗目标。在这三种策略中,MLC转换最为成功。基于每日CBCT的验证计划可用于评估运动管理策略的有效性,并在需要进一步剂量补偿时提供额外的剂量指导。

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