基于瓦里安加速器的海马保护性全脑放疗剂量学研究

中国辐射卫生 Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.13491/J.ISSN.1004-714X.2021.03.014

Xie Xin, L. Liang, Fan Xuemei, XU Yumei, Sha Guanchen, Liu Xiaoxiao

{"title":"基于瓦里安加速器的海马保护性全脑放疗剂量学研究","authors":"Xie Xin, L. Liang, Fan Xuemei, XU Yumei, Sha Guanchen, Liu Xiaoxiao","doi":"10.13491/J.ISSN.1004-714X.2021.03.014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective The purpose of this study is to provide a reference for the selection of clinical\n radiotherapy plan by comparing the difference of dosimetry between coplanar dynamic\n intensity modulation dIMRT and coplanar VMAT plan in hippocampal protective whole\n brain radiotherapy (WBRT).\n Methods 10 patients were selected whose hippocampal were protected by WBRT, dIMRT and VMAT\n plans were designed for each patient, the differences of target dose, organ-endangering\n dose and machine hop count were compared between the two groups.\n Results The two technical plans PTV V\n 30 Gy\n , D\n 98% and D\n 2%\n all meet the standard of RTOG 0933, which is better than the dIMRT group for the\n PTV HI VMAT group (\n P = 0.04), The hippocampal dose of dIMRT group was better than that of VMAT group,\n but it did not meet the standard of RGOT 0933. The average D\n max\n of hippocampus in dIMRT group and VMAT group was 18.44 Gy and 19.30 Gy, respectively\n (\n P = 0.004). The average value of hippocampal D\n min\n was 10.03 Gy and 10.77 Gy, respectively (\n P = 0.013), and the mean value of hippocampal D\n mean was 14.20 Gy and 15.12 Gy, respectively (\n P = 0.002). The doses of lens, eyeball and optic nerve all met the standard of RTOG0933,\n and the dose of dIMRT group was significantly better than that of VMAT group (\n P = 0.000). The treatment time in VMAT group was significantly lower than that in dIMRT\n group. The treatment time in VMAT group was significantly lower than that in dIMRT\n group.\n Conclusion Varian dIMRT has more advantages in controlling hippocampal dose and protecting lens\n than VMAT, but PTV HI and treatment efficiency are higher in VMAT group.\n 摘要：目的通过比较 Varian 加速器共面动态调强 dIMRT 与共面 VMAT 计划在海马保护全脑放疗 (WBRT) 中剂量学差异, 为临床放疗计划选择提供一种依据。\n 方法 10 例海马保护 WBRT 患者, 每名患者均设计 dIMRT 与 VMAT 计划, 比较两者靶区剂量、危及器官剂量和机器跳数的差异;。\n 结果 2 种技术计划 PTV V\n 30 Gy\n 、\n D\n 98% 和 D\n 2% 均符合 RTOG 0933 标准, 对于 PTV HI VMAT 组优于 dIMRT 组 (\n P = 0.004)。海马剂量 dIMRT 组优于 VMAT 组, 但均未达到 RGOT 0933 标准: dIMRT 组与 VMAT 组海马 D\n max 均值分别为 18.44 Gy 和 19.30 Gy, 有统计学差异 (\n P = 0.04); 海马 D\n min 均值分别为 10.03 Gy 和 10.77 Gy, 有统计学差异 (\n P = 0.013); 海马 D\n mean 均值分别为 14.20 Gy 和 15.12 Gy, 有统计学差异 (\n P = 0.002)。晶体、眼球和视神经剂量均符合 RTOG 0933 标准, dIMRT 组也明显优于 VMAT 组, 均 P = 0.000。VMAT 组治疗时间低于 dIMRT 组。\n 结论 Varian dIMRT 相比 VMAT 控制海马剂量和保护晶体更有优势, 但 VMAT 组 PTV HI 和治疗效率更高。","PeriodicalId":58844,"journal":{"name":"中国辐射卫生","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dosimetric study of hippocampal protective whole brain radiotherapy based on Varian accelerator\",\"authors\":\"Xie Xin, L. Liang, Fan Xuemei, XU Yumei, Sha Guanchen, Liu Xiaoxiao\",\"doi\":\"10.13491/J.ISSN.1004-714X.2021.03.014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objective The purpose of this study is to provide a reference for the selection of clinical\\n radiotherapy plan by comparing the difference of dosimetry between coplanar dynamic\\n intensity modulation dIMRT and coplanar VMAT plan in hippocampal protective whole\\n brain radiotherapy (WBRT).\\n Methods 10 patients were selected whose hippocampal were protected by WBRT, dIMRT and VMAT\\n plans were designed for each patient, the differences of target dose, organ-endangering\\n dose and machine hop count were compared between the two groups.\\n Results The two technical plans PTV V\\n 30 Gy\\n , D\\n 98% and D\\n 2%\\n all meet the standard of RTOG 0933, which is better than the dIMRT group for the\\n PTV HI VMAT group (\\n P = 0.04), The hippocampal dose of dIMRT group was better than that of VMAT group,\\n but it did not meet the standard of RGOT 0933. The average D\\n max\\n of hippocampus in dIMRT group and VMAT group was 18.44 Gy and 19.30 Gy, respectively\\n (\\n P = 0.004). The average value of hippocampal D\\n min\\n was 10.03 Gy and 10.77 Gy, respectively (\\n P = 0.013), and the mean value of hippocampal D\\n mean was 14.20 Gy and 15.12 Gy, respectively (\\n P = 0.002). The doses of lens, eyeball and optic nerve all met the standard of RTOG0933,\\n and the dose of dIMRT group was significantly better than that of VMAT group (\\n P = 0.000). The treatment time in VMAT group was significantly lower than that in dIMRT\\n group. The treatment time in VMAT group was significantly lower than that in dIMRT\\n group.\\n Conclusion Varian dIMRT has more advantages in controlling hippocampal dose and protecting lens\\n than VMAT, but PTV HI and treatment efficiency are higher in VMAT group.\\n 摘要：目的通过比较 Varian 加速器共面动态调强 dIMRT 与共面 VMAT 计划在海马保护全脑放疗 (WBRT) 中剂量学差异, 为临床放疗计划选择提供一种依据。\\n 方法 10 例海马保护 WBRT 患者, 每名患者均设计 dIMRT 与 VMAT 计划, 比较两者靶区剂量、危及器官剂量和机器跳数的差异;。\\n 结果 2 种技术计划 PTV V\\n 30 Gy\\n 、\\n D\\n 98% 和 D\\n 2% 均符合 RTOG 0933 标准, 对于 PTV HI VMAT 组优于 dIMRT 组 (\\n P = 0.004)。海马剂量 dIMRT 组优于 VMAT 组, 但均未达到 RGOT 0933 标准: dIMRT 组与 VMAT 组海马 D\\n max 均值分别为 18.44 Gy 和 19.30 Gy, 有统计学差异 (\\n P = 0.04); 海马 D\\n min 均值分别为 10.03 Gy 和 10.77 Gy, 有统计学差异 (\\n P = 0.013); 海马 D\\n mean 均值分别为 14.20 Gy 和 15.12 Gy, 有统计学差异 (\\n P = 0.002)。晶体、眼球和视神经剂量均符合 RTOG 0933 标准, dIMRT 组也明显优于 VMAT 组, 均 P = 0.000。VMAT 组治疗时间低于 dIMRT 组。\\n 结论 Varian dIMRT 相比 VMAT 控制海马剂量和保护晶体更有优势, 但 VMAT 组 PTV HI 和治疗效率更高。\",\"PeriodicalId\":58844,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"中国辐射卫生\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"中国辐射卫生\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1087\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.13491/J.ISSN.1004-714X.2021.03.014\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中国辐射卫生","FirstCategoryId":"1087","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13491/J.ISSN.1004-714X.2021.03.014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

目的通过比较共面动态强度调制dIMRT与共面VMAT计划在海马保护性全脑放疗(WBRT)中的剂量学差异，为临床放疗方案的选择提供参考。方法选择10例经WBRT保护海马的患者，为每例患者设计dIMRT和VMAT方案，比较两组靶剂量、器官危害剂量和机器跳数的差异。结果两种技术方案PTV v30 Gy、d98%和d2%均符合RTOG 0933标准，PTV HI VMAT组优于dIMRT组(P = 0.04)，海马剂量dIMRT组优于VMAT组，但不符合RGOT 0933标准。dIMRT组和VMAT组海马平均D max分别为18.44 Gy和19.30 Gy (P = 0.004)。海马D均值均值分别为10.03 Gy、10.77 Gy (P = 0.013)，海马D均值均值分别为14.20 Gy、15.12 Gy (P = 0.002)。晶状体、眼球、视神经剂量均符合RTOG0933标准，且dIMRT组剂量显著优于VMAT组(P = 0.000)。VMAT组治疗时间明显低于dIMRT组。VMAT组治疗时间明显低于dIMRT组。结论Varian dIMRT在控制海马剂量和保护晶状体方面优于VMAT组，但VMAT组的PTV HI和治疗效率更高。摘要:目的通过比较瓦里安加速器共面动态调强dIMRT与共面VMAT计划在海马保护全脑放疗(WBRT)中剂量学差异,为临床放疗计划选择提供一种依据。方法10例海马保护WBRT患者,每名患者均设计dIMRT与VMAT计划,比较两者靶区剂量,危及器官剂量和机器跳数的差异,。结果2种技术计划PTV V 30 Gy, 2%和98% D均符合RTOG 0933标准,对于PTV嗨VMAT组优于dIMRT组(P = 0.004)。海马剂量dIMRT组优于VMAT组,但均未达到RGOT 0933标准:dIMRT组与VMAT组海马D马克斯均值分别为18.44 Gy和19.30 Gy,有统计学差异(P = 0.04);海马D分钟均值分别为10.03 Gy和10.77 Gy,有统计学差异(P = 0.013);海马D意味着均值分别为14.20 Gy和15.12 Gy,有统计学差异(P = 0.002)。晶体,眼球和视神经剂量均符合RTOG 0933标准,dIMRT组也明显优于VMAT组,均P = 0.000。immrt;结论瓦里安dIMRT相比VMAT控制海马剂量和保护晶体更有优势,但VMAT组PTV嗨和治疗效率更高。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Dosimetric study of hippocampal protective whole brain radiotherapy based on Varian accelerator

Objective The purpose of this study is to provide a reference for the selection of clinical radiotherapy plan by comparing the difference of dosimetry between coplanar dynamic intensity modulation dIMRT and coplanar VMAT plan in hippocampal protective whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT). Methods 10 patients were selected whose hippocampal were protected by WBRT, dIMRT and VMAT plans were designed for each patient, the differences of target dose, organ-endangering dose and machine hop count were compared between the two groups. Results The two technical plans PTV V 30 Gy , D 98% and D 2% all meet the standard of RTOG 0933, which is better than the dIMRT group for the PTV HI VMAT group ( P = 0.04), The hippocampal dose of dIMRT group was better than that of VMAT group, but it did not meet the standard of RGOT 0933. The average D max of hippocampus in dIMRT group and VMAT group was 18.44 Gy and 19.30 Gy, respectively ( P = 0.004). The average value of hippocampal D min was 10.03 Gy and 10.77 Gy, respectively ( P = 0.013), and the mean value of hippocampal D mean was 14.20 Gy and 15.12 Gy, respectively ( P = 0.002). The doses of lens, eyeball and optic nerve all met the standard of RTOG0933, and the dose of dIMRT group was significantly better than that of VMAT group ( P = 0.000). The treatment time in VMAT group was significantly lower than that in dIMRT group. The treatment time in VMAT group was significantly lower than that in dIMRT group. Conclusion Varian dIMRT has more advantages in controlling hippocampal dose and protecting lens than VMAT, but PTV HI and treatment efficiency are higher in VMAT group. 摘要：目的通过比较 Varian 加速器共面动态调强 dIMRT 与共面 VMAT 计划在海马保护全脑放疗 (WBRT) 中剂量学差异, 为临床放疗计划选择提供一种依据。方法 10 例海马保护 WBRT 患者, 每名患者均设计 dIMRT 与 VMAT 计划, 比较两者靶区剂量、危及器官剂量和机器跳数的差异;。结果 2 种技术计划 PTV V 30 Gy 、 D 98% 和 D 2% 均符合 RTOG 0933 标准, 对于 PTV HI VMAT 组优于 dIMRT 组 ( P = 0.004)。海马剂量 dIMRT 组优于 VMAT 组, 但均未达到 RGOT 0933 标准: dIMRT 组与 VMAT 组海马 D max 均值分别为 18.44 Gy 和 19.30 Gy, 有统计学差异 ( P = 0.04); 海马 D min 均值分别为 10.03 Gy 和 10.77 Gy, 有统计学差异 ( P = 0.013); 海马 D mean 均值分别为 14.20 Gy 和 15.12 Gy, 有统计学差异 ( P = 0.002)。晶体、眼球和视神经剂量均符合 RTOG 0933 标准, dIMRT 组也明显优于 VMAT 组, 均 P = 0.000。VMAT 组治疗时间低于 dIMRT 组。结论 Varian dIMRT 相比 VMAT 控制海马剂量和保护晶体更有优势, 但 VMAT 组 PTV HI 和治疗效率更高。

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

中国辐射卫生

CiteScore

0.80

自引率

0.00%

发文量

7142

期刊介绍： Chinese Journal of Radiological Health is one of the Source Journals for Chinese Scientific and Technical Papers and Citations and belongs to the series published by Chinese Preventive Medicine Association (CPMA). It is a national academic journal supervised by National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China and co-sponsored by Institute of Radiation Medicine, Shandong Academy of Medical Sciences and CPMA, and is a professional academic journal publishing research findings and management experience in the field of radiological health, issued to the public in China and abroad. Under the guidance of the Communist Party of China and the national press and publication policies, the Journal actively publicizes the guidelines and policies of the Party and the state on health work, promotes the implementation of relevant laws, regulations and standards, and timely reports new achievements, new information, new methods and new products in the specialty, with the aim of organizing and promoting the academic communication of radiological health in China and improving the academic level of the specialty, and for the purpose of protecting the health of radiation workers and the public while promoting the extensive use of radioisotopes and radiation devices in the national economy. The main columns include Original Articles, Expert Comments, Experience Exchange, Standards and Guidelines, and Review Articles.