• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics >Rectal dose-volume differences using proton radiotherapy and a rectal balloon or water alone for the treatment of prostate cancer.
【24h】

Rectal dose-volume differences using proton radiotherapy and a rectal balloon or water alone for the treatment of prostate cancer.

机译：使用质子放射疗法和单独使用直肠球囊或水治疗前列腺癌时的直肠剂量-体积差异。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

PURPOSE: To describe dose-volume values with the use of water alone vs. a rectal balloon (RB) for the treatment of prostate cancer with proton therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 30 proton plans for 15 patients who underwent CT and MRI scans with an RB or water alone. Simulation was performed with a modified MRI endorectal coil and an RB with 100 mL of water or water alone. Doses of 78-82 gray equivalents were prescribed to the planning target volume. The two groups were compared for three structures: rectum, rectal wall (RW), and rectal wall 7 cm (RW7) at the level of the planning target volume. RESULTS: Rectum and RW volumes radiated to low, intermediate, and high doses were small: rectum V10, 33.7%; V50, 17.3%; and V70, 10.2%; RW V10, 32.4%; V50, 20.4%; and V70, 14.6%. The RB effectively increased the rectal volume for all cases (139.8 +/- 44.9 mL vs. 217.7 +/- 32.2 mL (p < 0.001). The RB also decreased the volume of the rectum radiated to doses V10-V65 (p < or = 0.05); RW for V10-V50; and RW7 for V10-V35. An absolute rectum V50 improvement >5% was seen for the RB in 5 of 15 cases, for a benefit of 9.2% +/- 2.3% compared with 2.4% +/- 1.3% for the remaining 10 cases (p < 0.001). Similar benefit was seen for the rectal wall. No benefit was seen for doses > or =70 gray equivalents for the rectum, RW, or RW7. No benefit of < or =1% was seen with an RB in 46% for the rectum V70 and in 40% for the rectal wall V70. CONCLUSIONS: Rectum and rectal wall doses with proton radiation were low whether using water or an RB. Selected patients will have a small but significant advantage with an RB; however, water alone was well tolerated and will be an alternative for most patients.
机译：目的：描述通过质子疗法单独使用水与直肠球囊（RB）的剂量-体积值。材料与方法：我们分析了15例仅用RB或水进行CT和MRI扫描的患者的30个质子计划。使用改良的MRI直肠内线圈和仅含100 mL水或仅加水的RB进行模拟。计划的目标剂量为78-82灰度当量剂量。比较了两组的三个结构：直肠，直肠壁（RW）和在计划目标体积水平的直肠壁7厘米（RW7）。结果：低剂量，中剂量和高剂量的直肠和RW体积较小：直肠V10为33.7％;直肠V10为33.7％。 V50，17.3％; V70为10.2％; RW V10，32.4％; V50，20.4％; V70为14.6％。 RB有效地增加了所有病例的直肠体积（139.8 +/- 44.9 mL和217.7 +/- 32.2 mL（p <0.001）。RB也减小了放射至V10-V65剂量的直肠体积（p <或= 0.05）; V10-V50的RW; V10-V35的RW7; 15例中有5例的RB的绝对直肠V50改善> 5％，获益为9.2％+/- 2.3％，而2.4例其余10例患者的百分比+/- 1.3％（p <0.001）。直肠壁的获益相似;直肠，RW或RW7剂量大于或等于70灰当量的剂量则无益处。结论：直肠V70的RB≤46％，而直肠V70的RB≤40％结论：不论是用水还是RB，质子辐射的直肠和直肠壁剂量都很低。 RB的优点虽小，但意义重大;但是，水的耐受性很好，将成为大多数患者的替代选择。

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