Suppr超能文献

机器人和 LINAC 治疗脊柱立体定向体放射治疗的剂量学比较。

Dosimetric comparison of robotic- and LINAC-based treatment of spine stereotactic body radiotherapy.

机构信息

Medicine Faculty, Department of Radiation Oncology, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul 34214, Turkey.

Medicine Faculty, Department of Radiation Oncology, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul 34214, Turkey.

出版信息

Med Dosim. 2022;47(4):348-355. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2022.08.002. Epub 2022 Sep 28.

Abstract

To determine which treatment technique and modality would offer better dosimetric results and be preferable for spinal stereotactic body therapy (SBRT) depending on the three different regions of the vertebrae. Linear accelerator (LINAC)- and CyberKnife (CK)-based treatment techniques were compared in terms of their dosimetric quality, treatment efficiency, and delivery accuracy. Thirty previously treated patients were included in this study. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) techniques were used for LINAC-based treatment, whereas CK-based treatment plans were generated for two different collimator systems: fixed and multileaf collimator (MLC). The plans were compared based on spinal cord sparing, dose homogeneity, conformity index (CI), gradient index (GI), monitor unit (MU), and beam-on time. The percentage volumes of V2Gy, V5Gy (representing volume low of the dose spillage region), V10Gy, and V20Gy (representing the volume of the high-dose spillage region) of the healthy tissue were analyzed. The CI and GI of the VMAT plans were better than those of the IMRT plans. For spinal cord sparing, the VMAT and MLC-based CK (CK-MLC) techniques were superior. The percentage of low-dose spillage regions was the lowest for IMRT and fixed cone-based CK (CK-FIX) plans. The percentage of the high-dose spillage region was the lowest for the VMAT and CK-MLC plans. In terms of treatment efficiency, the VMAT and CK-MLC plans were superior to the IMRT and CK-FIX plans. The VMAT technique lowered the MU and beam-on time values. The plan delivery accuracy of the VMAT and CK-FIX plans was better than that of the IMRT plans. VMAT is the best option for LINAC-based spinal SBRT. For CK-based spinal SBRT, MLC-based plans are preferred. If the clinic has both treatment modalities and the patient can tolerate long treatment times, CK-MLC-based treatment should be chosen because of its superiority in sparing the spinal cord and sharp dose fall-off.

摘要

为了确定哪种治疗技术和方式在脊柱立体定向体部放疗(SBRT)中能提供更好的剂量学结果,并根据椎体的三个不同区域更具优势。在剂量学质量、治疗效率和输送精度方面比较了基于线性加速器(LINAC)和 CyberKnife(CK)的治疗技术。本研究纳入了 30 例先前接受治疗的患者。基于 LINAC 的治疗采用调强放疗(IMRT)和容积调强弧形治疗(VMAT)技术,而 CK 治疗计划则为两种不同的准直器系统生成:固定准直器和多叶准直器(MLC)。根据脊髓保护、剂量均匀性、适形指数(CI)、梯度指数(GI)、监测器单位(MU)和射束开启时间比较计划。分析了健康组织的 V2Gy、V5Gy(代表剂量溢出区域的低剂量体积)、V10Gy 和 V20Gy(代表高剂量溢出区域的体积)的百分比体积。VMAT 计划的 CI 和 GI 优于 IMRT 计划。在脊髓保护方面,VMAT 和 MLC 基 CK(CK-MLC)技术具有优势。IMRT 和固定锥基 CK(CK-FIX)计划的低剂量溢出区域比例最低。VMAT 和 CK-MLC 计划的高剂量溢出区域比例最低。在治疗效率方面,VMAT 和 CK-MLC 计划优于 IMRT 和 CK-FIX 计划。VMAT 技术降低了 MU 和射束开启时间值。VMAT 和 CK-FIX 计划的计划输送精度优于 IMRT 计划。VMAT 是 LINAC 基脊柱 SBRT 的最佳选择。对于 CK 基脊柱 SBRT,建议使用 MLC 基计划。如果临床有两种治疗方式,且患者能耐受较长的治疗时间,由于 CK-MLC 基治疗在脊髓保护和陡峭剂量下降方面具有优势,应选择 CK-MLC 基治疗。

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