Suppr超能文献

使用不同叶宽多叶准直器进行动态适形弧和调强放射外科治疗计划的剂量学研究。

Dosimetric study using different leaf-width MLCs for treatment planning of dynamic conformal arcs and intensity-modulated radiosurgery.

作者信息

Jin Jian-Yue, Yin Fang-Fang, Ryu Samuel, Ajlouni Munther, Kim Jae Ho

机构信息

Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, Michigan 48202, USA.

出版信息

Med Phys. 2005 Feb;32(2):405-11. doi: 10.1118/1.1842911.

Abstract

This paper systematically studied the dosimetric difference between a 3 mm micro multileaf collimator (MLC), a 5 mm MLC, and a 10 mm MLC for stereotactic radiosurgery using the Brainscan treatment planning system. Thirty-four cases treated with the dynamic conformal arcs technique and 20 cases treated with the intensity modulated radiosurgery/fractionated radiotherapy (IMRS/ IMRT) technique were retrospectively studied. The conformity index, the percentage target coverage, and the dose-volume histogram (DVH) for organs-at-risk (OARs) were used for dosimetric analysis and comparison for different treatment techniques, target volumes, and treatment sites. For the dynamic conformal arcs technique, there were statistically significant differences in the conformity indices between different leaf-width MLCs. The ratio of the conformity indices between different MLCs depended on the target volume. The average conformity index ratios between the 5 mm MLC and the 3 mm MLC were 1.37+/-0.09, 1.12+/-0.04, 1.08+/-0.02 and 1.04+/-0.01, respectively, for patients with the target volume (V) in groups: (1) V< 1 cm3, (2) 1 cm3 < V< 8 cm3, (3) 8 cm3 < V< 27 cm3, and (4) V> 27 CC. The average conformity index ratios between the 10 and 3 mm MLCs were 2.00+/-0.33, 1.45+/-0.09, 1.28+/-0.09, and 1.18+/-0.05 for patients in these four volume groups, respectively. No statistically significant difference was found for the target coverage among different MLCs. For the IMRS/IMRT technique, the average conformity index and target coverage ratios were 1.01+/-0.05 and 1.00+/-0.02, respectively, between the 5 and 3 mm MLCs, and were 1.04+/-0.07 and 0.97+/-0.02, respectively, between the 10 and 3 mm MLCs. The 3 mm MLC showed slightly better overall OAR DVHs than the 5 and 10 mm MLCs, especially for the cranial site with small-volume OARs defined. The results suggest that for the dynamic conformal arcs technique, the narrower leaf-width MLC provides better dose conformity than the wider leaf-width MLCs. This advantage decreases when the target volume increases. For the IMRS/IMRT technique, the narrower leaf-width MLC could have better sparing of small OARs than the wider leaf-width MLC.

摘要

本文使用Brainscan治疗计划系统,系统地研究了用于立体定向放射外科的3毫米微型多叶准直器(MLC)、5毫米MLC和10毫米MLC之间的剂量学差异。回顾性研究了34例采用动态适形弧技术治疗的病例和20例采用调强放射外科/分次放射治疗(IMRS/IMRT)技术治疗的病例。使用适形指数、靶区覆盖百分比和危及器官(OAR)的剂量体积直方图(DVH),对不同治疗技术、靶区体积和治疗部位进行剂量学分析和比较。对于动态适形弧技术,不同叶宽MLC之间的适形指数存在统计学显著差异。不同MLC之间适形指数的比值取决于靶区体积。对于靶区体积(V)分别在以下组的患者:(1)V<1 cm³,(2)1 cm³<V<8 cm³,(3)8 cm³<V<27 cm³,以及(4)V>27 CC,5毫米MLC与3毫米MLC之间的平均适形指数比值分别为1.37±0.09、1.12±0.04、1.08±0.02和1.04±0.01。这四组体积患者中,10毫米MLC与3毫米MLC之间的平均适形指数比值分别为2.00±0.33、1.45±0.09、1.28±0.09和1.18±0.05。不同MLC之间的靶区覆盖未发现统计学显著差异。对于IMRS/IMRT技术,5毫米MLC与3毫米MLC之间的平均适形指数和靶区覆盖比值分别为1.01±0.05和1.00±0.02,10毫米MLC与3毫米MLC之间分别为1.04±0.07和0.97±0.02。3毫米MLC在总体OAR的DVH方面比5毫米和10毫米MLC略好,特别是对于定义了小体积OAR的颅部部位。结果表明,对于动态适形弧技术,叶宽较窄的MLC比叶宽较宽的MLC提供更好的剂量适形性。当靶区体积增加时,这种优势会降低。对于IMRS/IMRT技术,叶宽较窄的MLC与叶宽较宽的MLC相比,对小OAR可能有更好的保护作用。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验