Srivastava Shiv P, Das Indra J, Kumar Arvind, Johnstone Peter A S
Department of Radiation Oncology, Reid Hospital & Health Care Services, Richmond, IN 46202, USA.
Med Dosim. 2011 Autumn;36(3):313-6. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2010.07.001. Epub 2010 Sep 3.
Dosimetric comparison of manual beam angle selection (MBS) and beam angle optimization (BAO) for IMRT plans is investigated retrospectively for 15 head and neck and prostate patients. The head and neck and prostate had planning target volumes (PTVs) ranging between 96.0 and 319.9 cm(3) and 153.6 and 321.3 cm(3), whereas OAR ranged between 8.3 and 47.8 cm(3) and 68.3 and 469.2 cm(3), respectively. In MBS, a standard coplanar 7-9 fields equally spaced gantry angles were used. In BAO, the selection of gantry angle was optimized by the algorithm for the same number of beams. The optimization and dose-volume constraints were kept the same for both techniques. Treatment planning was performed on the Eclipse treatment planning system. Our results showed that the dose-volume histogram for PTV are nearly identical in both techniques but BAO provided superior sparing of the organs at risk compared with the MBS. Also, MBS produced statistically significant higher monitor units (MU) and segments than the BAO; 13.1 ± 6.6% (p = 0.012) and 10.4 ± 13.6% (p = 0.140), and 14.6 ± 5.6% (p = 1.003E-5) and 12.6 ± 7.4% (p = 0.76E-3) for head and neck and prostate cases, respectively. The reduction in MU translates into the reduction in total body and integral dose. It is concluded that BAO provides advantage over MBS for most intenisty-modulated radiation therapy cases.
对15例头颈部和前列腺癌患者进行回顾性研究,比较调强放疗计划中手动束角选择(MBS)和束角优化(BAO)的剂量学差异。头颈部和前列腺癌患者的计划靶体积(PTV)分别在96.0至319.9 cm³和153.6至321.3 cm³之间,而危及器官(OAR)分别在8.3至47.8 cm³和68.3至469.2 cm³之间。在MBS中,使用标准共面7 - 9野等间隔机架角。在BAO中,通过算法对相同束数的机架角进行优化选择。两种技术的优化和剂量体积约束保持相同。在Eclipse治疗计划系统上进行治疗计划。我们的结果表明,两种技术中PTV的剂量体积直方图几乎相同,但与MBS相比,BAO对危及器官的保护更好。此外,MBS产生的监测单位(MU)和子野在统计学上显著高于BAO;头颈部和前列腺病例中,MU分别高13.1±6.6%(p = 0.012)和10.4±13.6%(p = 0.140),子野分别高14.6±5.6%(p = 1.003E - 5)和12.6±7.4%(p = 0.76E - 3)。MU的减少转化为全身剂量和积分剂量的减少。结论是,对于大多数调强放射治疗病例,BAO比MBS更具优势。