a Department of Radiation Oncology , Hyperthermia Unit, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute , Rotterdam , The Netherlands.
Int J Hyperthermia. 2018 Sep;34(6):704-713. doi: 10.1080/02656736.2017.1383517. Epub 2017 Oct 16.
In this study, we investigated the differences in hyperthermia treatment (HT) quality between treatments applied with different hyperthermia systems for sub-superficial tumours in the head and neck (H&N) region.
In 24 patients, with a clinical target volume (CTV) extending up to 6 cm from the surface, we retrospectively analysed the predicted HT quality achievable by two planar applicator arrays or one phased-array hyperthermia system. Hereto, we calculated and compared the specific absorption rate (SAR) and temperature distribution coverage of the CTV and gross tumour volume (GTV) for the Lucite cone applicator (LCA: planar), current sheet applicator (CSA: planar) and the HYPERcollar (phased-array).
The HYPERcollar provides better SAR coverage than planar applicators if the target region is fully enclosed by its applicator frame. For targets extending outside the HYPERcollar frame, sufficient SAR coverage (25% target coverage, i.e. TC25 ≥ 75%) can still be achieved using the LCA when the target is fully under the LCA aperture and not deeper than 50 mm from the patient surface.
Simulations predict that the HYPERcollar (hence also its successor the HYPERcollar3D) is to be preferred over planar applicators such as LCA and current sheet applicator in sub-superficial tumours in the H&N region when used within specifications.
本研究旨在探讨应用不同的高温治疗系统治疗头颈部（H&N）浅表肿瘤时，高温治疗质量的差异。
在 24 名患者中，临床靶区（CTV）从表面延伸至 6cm 以内，我们回顾性分析了两种平面施源器阵列或一种相控阵高温治疗系统所能达到的预测高温治疗质量。为此，我们计算并比较了 Lucite 圆锥施源器（LCA：平面）、电流片施源器（CSA：平面）和 HYPERcollar（相控阵）的 CTV 和大体肿瘤体积（GTV）的比吸收率（SAR）和温度分布覆盖情况。
如果目标区域完全被其施源器框架包围，HYPERcollar 提供的 SAR 覆盖范围优于平面施源器。对于超出 HYPERcollar 框架的目标，如果目标完全位于 LCA 孔径下且距患者表面不超过 50mm，则仍可使用 LCA 实现足够的 SAR 覆盖（25%目标覆盖，即 TC25≥75%）。
模拟预测，在 H&N 区域的浅表肿瘤中，当在规范内使用时，HYPERcollar（及其后继 HYPERcollar3D）优于 LCA 和电流片施源器等平面施源器。
