...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Medical dosimetry: official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists >Dosimetric comparison of rapidarc with fixed gantry intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment for multiple liver metastases radiotherapy
【24h】

Dosimetric comparison of rapidarc with fixed gantry intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment for multiple liver metastases radiotherapy

机译：快速弧光与固定龙门调强放疗治疗多发肝转移的剂量学比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

We wanted to compare the dosimetric difference and treatment efficiency of RapidArc and fixed gantry intensity-modulated radiotherapy treatment (IMRT) for multiple liver metastases. Computed tomography datasets of 10 patients were studied retrospectively. IMRT plans were generated using 5 fields and RapidArc using either 1 or 2 arcs. The dose distribution of planning target volume (PTV), organs at risk (OARs), and the normal tissue were compared. Monitor units and treatment time were scored to measure expected treatment efficiency. Both RapidArc and IMRT plans resulted in equivalent target coverage. There was no statistically significant difference for the maximum and the minimum dose of PTV. RapidArc plans achieved an improved conformity index compared with IMRT (RA1 = 1.68 ± 0.27, RA2 = 1.61 ± 0.25, IMRT = 1.80 ± 0.37). For OARs, all techniques respected planning objectives. RapidArc plans had a lower dose in V 40 of small bowel than IMRT, but were higher in mean dose of kidneys. Concerning the V 5, V 10, and V 15 of healthy tissue, RapidArc plans were higher than IMRT. However, the V 20, V 25, and V 30 of healthy tissue in RapidArc plans were lower than IMRT. Monitor units per fraction of RapidArc plans were about 40% or 46% of IMRT. Compared with IMRT plans, treatment time of RapidArc plans were reduced by 60% or 70%. All techniques respected planning objectives. RapidArc showed statistical improvements in conformity index and healthy tissue sparing with uncompromised target coverage. This, in combination with fewer monitor units and short delivery time, can lead to clinically significant advances for the treatment of multiple liver metastases.
机译：我们想比较RapidArc和固定式龙门调强放射治疗（IMRT）对多种肝转移的剂量学差异和治疗效率。回顾性研究了10例患者的计算机断层扫描数据集。 IMRT计划使用5个字段生成，RapidArc使用1个或2个弧生成。比较了计划目标体积（PTV），危险器官（OARs）和正常组织的剂量分布。对监测器单位和治疗时间进行评分，以衡量预期的治疗效率。 RapidArc和IMRT计划都产生了相同的目标覆盖率。 PTV的最大和最小剂量没有统计学上的显着差异。与IMRT相比，RapidArc计划获得了更高的合格指数（RA1 = 1.68±0.27，RA2 = 1.61±0.25，IMRT = 1.80±0.37）。对于OAR，所有技术都遵循计划目标。 RapidArc计划的小肠V 40剂量低于IMRT，但肾脏平均剂量更高。关于健康组织的V 5，V 10和V 15，RapidArc计划高于IMRT。但是，RapidArc计划中健康组织的V 20，V 25和V 30低于IMRT。 RapidArc计划每部分的监视单元约为IMRT的40％或46％。与IMRT计划相比，RapidArc计划的处理时间减少了60％或70％。所有技术都遵守计划目标。 RapidArc在合格指数和健康组织备用方面均显示出统计上的改进，而目标覆盖范围却毫不妥协。这与更少的监护仪装置和较短的交货时间相结合，可以在治疗多发性肝转移方面带来临床上的重大进步。

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