Dosimetric comparison of IMRT vs. 3D conformal radiotherapy.pdfVIP

下载本文档

6
0
约2.46万字
约 5页
2017-04-11 发布于江苏
举报
版权申诉

Dosimetric comparison of IMRT vs. 3D conformal radiotherapy.pdf

1、有哪些信誉好的足球投注网站（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。。
2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。
4、该文档为VIP文档，如果想要下载，成为VIP会员后，下载免费。
5、成为VIP后，下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后，不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
6、成为VIP后，您将拥有八大权益，权益包括：VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传，每下载1次，网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等，对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档

Dosimetric comparison of IMRT vs. 3D conformal radiotherapy

Radiotherapy and Oncology 89 (2008) 287–291 IMRT in esophageal cancerDosimetric comparison of IMRT vs. 3D conformal radiotherapy in the treatment of cancer of the cervical esophagusq Louis Fenkella, Inna Kaminskyc, Stephen Breenb, Sophie Huangc, Monique Van Prooijenb, Jolie Ringasha,* aDepartment of Radiation Oncology, and bDepartment of Radiation Physics, Princess Margaret Hospital and University of Toronto, ON, Canada, cRadiation Medicine Programme, Princess Margaret Hospital, ON, CanadaAbstract Background and Purpose: Radiotherapy planning for cervical esophageal cancer is challenging. We compared IMRT and 3D conformal radiotherapy (CRT) with respect to conformality of target coverage and normal tissue sparing. Materials and methods: We selected five patients with cervical esophagus cancer, who represented the heterogeneity of clinical cases, treated to radical dose and planned with Pinnacle v6.2. Target doses for CRT plans were 50, 60, and 70 Gy (single-phase IMRT 56, 63, and 70). We compared PTV coverage by the 95% isodose (PTV95), conformality ratio (CR), conformation number (CN), and maximum or mean doses (Dmax, Dmean) to normal structures. Results: Median PTV95 for IMRT plans for PTV70, PTV63, and PTV56 were 97%, 99%, and 98% (CRT 91%, 98%, and 85%). IMRT plans demonstrated lower Dmax to the spinal cord and brainstem (42 and 36 Gy) compared to CRT (46 and 39 Gy). Median left parotid Dmean was 35 Gy (IMRT) vs. 53 Gy (CRT). Median right parotid Dmean was 35 Gy (IMRT) vs. 36 Gy (CRT). The median CR50/56 Gy was 1.4 (CRT) vs. 1.2 (IMRT), CR70 Gy 1.7 (CRT) vs. 1.1 (IMRT). CN50/56 and CN70 values were 0.80 and 0.85 (IMRT) vs. 0.56 and 0.5 (CRT). Conclusions: IMRT provides superior target volume coverage and conformality, with decreased dose to normal structures.c 2008 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved. Radiotherapy and Oncology 89 (2008) 287–291. Keywords: Cervical esophageal cancer; Intensity-modulated radiotherapy; Conformal radiotherapy; ToxicityOrgan p