Hashimoto Takayuki, Demizu Yusuke, Numajiri Haruko, Isobe Tomonori, Fukuda Shigekazu, Wakatsuki Masaru, Yamashita Haruo, Murayama Shigeyuki, Takamatsu Shigeyuki, Katoh Hiroyuki, Murata Kazutoshi, Kohno Ryosuke, Arimura Takeshi, Matsuura Taeko, Ito Yoichi M
Department of Radiation Medical Science and Engineering, Faculty of Medicine, Hokkaido University, North 15 West 7, Kita-ku, Sapporo, Hokkaido, 060-8638, Japan.
Department of Radiology, Hyogo Ion Beam Medical Center, 1-2-1 Kouto, Shingu-cho, Tatsuno, Hyogo, Japan.
Jpn J Radiol. 2022 May;40(5):525-533. doi: 10.1007/s11604-021-01218-1. Epub 2021 Nov 15.
To evaluate the outcomes of particle therapy in cancer patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs).
From April 2001 to March 2013, 19,585 patients were treated with proton beam therapy (PBT) or carbon ion therapy (CIT) at 8 institutions. Of these, 69 patients (0.4%, PBT 46, CIT 22, and PBT + CIT 1) with CIEDs (64 pacemakers, 4 implantable cardioverter defibrillators, and 1 with a cardiac resynchronization therapy defibrillator) were retrospectively reviewed. All the patients with CIEDs in this study were treated with the passive scattering type of particle beam therapy.
Six (13%) of the 47 PBT patients, and none of the 23 CIT patients experienced CIED malfunctions (p = 0.105). Electrical resets (7) and over-sensing (3) occurred transiently in 6 patients. The distance between the edge of the irradiation field and the CIED was not associated with the incidence of malfunctions in 20 patients with lung cancer. A larger field size had a higher event rate but the test to evaluate trends as not statistically significant (p = 0.196).
Differences in the frequency of occurrence of device malfunctions for patients treated with PBT and patients treated with CIT did not reach statistical significance. The present study can be regarded as a benchmark study about the incidence of malfunctioning of CIED in passive scattering particle beam therapy and can be used as a reference for active scanning particle beam therapy.
评估心脏植入式电子设备(CIED)癌症患者接受粒子治疗的效果。
2001年4月至2013年3月,8家机构对19585例患者进行了质子束治疗(PBT)或碳离子治疗(CIT)。其中,对69例(0.4%,PBT 46例、CIT 22例、PBT + CIT 1例)植入CIED的患者(64例起搏器、4例植入式心律转复除颤器、1例心脏再同步治疗除颤器)进行了回顾性分析。本研究中所有植入CIED的患者均接受了被动散射型粒子束治疗。
47例PBT患者中有6例(13%)出现CIED故障,23例CIT患者均未出现CIED故障(p = 0.105)。6例患者出现了短暂的电重置(7次)和过感知(3次)。在20例肺癌患者中,照射野边缘与CIED之间的距离与故障发生率无关。较大的照射野尺寸事件发生率更高,但评估趋势的检验无统计学意义(p = 0.196)。
PBT治疗患者和CIT治疗患者的设备故障发生频率差异未达到统计学意义。本研究可视为被动散射粒子束治疗中CIED故障发生率的基准研究,可为主动扫描粒子束治疗提供参考。