Max Healthcare.
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014 May 8;15(3):4509. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v15i3.4509.
Intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) and interstitial brachytherapy (IB) techniques are commonly practiced for treating carcinoma of the cervix, either alone or in combination with external beam radiotherapy. Both these brachytherapy techniques have their own advantages and limitations in terms of tumor coverage and normal tissue sparing. Limited studies have been reported comparing the dosimetric features of these two techniques, especially from a single institution. We carried out a prospective clinical dosimetric comparison between ICBT and IB for patients treated at one center to bring out the inherent dosimetric features of these to two techniques. The study was carried out on 26 patients treated with ICBT and 55 with IB using CT-based planning. Of the 55 patients treated with IB, 27 included tandem source loading (IBT) and 28 without the tandem loading (IBWT). The high-dose volumes covered by 200% and 180% isodose surfaces were considerably larger in ICBT as compared to IB, whereas the treated volume was larger in IB as compared to ICBT. The bladder and rectal doses were the highest in ICBT and IBWT, respectively. The larger treated volume in IB as compared to ICBT was mainly because patients with larger tumor volumes were generally considered for IB. The results also indicated that in interstitial brachytherapy, better rectal sparing was achieved by including the tandem for treatment delivery.
腔内近距离放疗(ICBT)和间质近距离放疗(IB)技术常用于治疗宫颈癌,单独使用或与外部束放射治疗联合使用。这两种近距离放疗技术在肿瘤覆盖和保护正常组织方面都有各自的优势和局限性。据报道,很少有研究比较这两种技术的剂量学特征,尤其是来自单一机构的研究。我们对一家中心治疗的患者进行了 ICBT 和 IB 的前瞻性临床剂量学比较,以揭示这两种技术的固有剂量学特征。这项研究共纳入了 26 例接受 ICBT 治疗的患者和 55 例接受基于 CT 计划的 IB 治疗的患者。在接受 IB 治疗的 55 例患者中,27 例采用了串联源加载(IBT),28 例未采用串联源加载(IBWT)。与 IB 相比,ICBT 中 200%和 180%等剂量表面覆盖的高剂量体积要大得多,而 IB 中的治疗体积要大于 ICBT。膀胱和直肠的剂量在 ICBT 和 IBWT 中分别最高。与 ICBT 相比,IB 中的治疗体积更大,主要是因为一般认为肿瘤体积较大的患者适合接受 IB 治疗。结果还表明,在间质近距离放疗中,通过包括串联源进行治疗,可以更好地保护直肠。