• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

钛植入物对脊柱 SBRT 四种商业治疗计划算法剂量学的影响。

The dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spinal SBRT using four commercial treatment planning algorithms.

机构信息

Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, USA.

出版信息

J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2023 Oct;24(10):e14070. doi: 10.1002/acm2.14070. Epub 2023 Aug 4.

DOI:10.1002/acm2.14070
PMID:37540084
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10562029/
Abstract

To evaluate the dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spine SBRT using four dose calculation algorithms. Twenty patients with titanium implants in the spine treated with SBRT without density override (DO) were selected. The clinical plan for each patient was created in Pinnacle and subsequently imported into Eclipse (AAA and AcurosXB) and Raystation (CC) for dose evaluation with and without DO to the titanium implant. We renormalized all plans such that 90% of the tumor volume received the prescription dose and subsequently evaluated the following dose metrics: (1) the maximum dose to 0.03 cc (Dmax), dose to 99% (D99%) and 90% (D90%) of the tumor volume; (2) Dmax and volumetric metrics of the spinal cord. For the same algorithm, plans with and without DO had similar dose distributions. Differences in Dmax, D99% and D90% of the tumor were on average <2% with slightly larger variations up to 5.58% in Dmax using AcurosXB. Dmax of the spinal cord for plans calculated with DO increased but the differences were clinically insignificant for all algorithms (mean: 0.36% ± 0.7%). Comparing to the clinical plans, the relative differences for all algorithms had an average of 1.73% (-10.36%-13.21%) for the tumor metrics and -0.93% (-9.87%-10.95%) for Dmax of the spinal cord. A few cases with small tumor and spinal cord volumes, dose differences of >10% in both D99% and Dmax of the tumor, and Dmax of the spinal cord were observed. For all algorithms, the presence of titanium implants in the spine for most patients had minimal impact on dose distributions with and without DO. For the same plan calculated with different algorithms, larger differences in volumetric metrics of >10% could be observed, impacted by dose gradient at the plan normalization volume, tumor volumes, plan complexity, and partial voxel volume interpolation.

摘要

评估脊柱 SBRT 中钛植入物的剂量学影响,使用四种剂量计算算法。选择了 20 名脊柱内有钛植入物且未进行密度覆盖(DO)的 SBRT 治疗患者。为每位患者在 Pinnacle 中创建临床计划,然后将其导入 Eclipse(AAA 和 AcurosXB)和 Raystation(CC)中,以评估有和无钛植入物 DO 时的剂量。我们对所有计划进行重新归一化,使 90%的肿瘤体积接受处方剂量,然后评估以下剂量指标:(1)0.03cc 的最大剂量(Dmax)、肿瘤 99%(D99%)和 90%(D90%)的剂量;(2)脊髓的 Dmax 和体积学指标。对于相同的算法,有和无 DO 的计划具有相似的剂量分布。肿瘤的 Dmax、D99%和 D90%的差异平均<2%,在使用 AcurosXB 时最大可达 5.58%。使用 DO 计算的计划中脊髓的 Dmax 增加,但对于所有算法,差异在临床意义上不显著(平均值:0.36%±0.7%)。与临床计划相比,对于所有算法,肿瘤指标的相对差异平均为 1.73%(-10.36%至-13.21%),脊髓的 Dmax 为-0.93%(-9.87%至-10.95%)。对于少数肿瘤和脊髓体积较小的病例,肿瘤的 D99%和 Dmax 以及脊髓的 Dmax 剂量差异超过 10%。对于所有算法,脊柱内钛植入物的存在对有和无 DO 的剂量分布影响最小。对于用不同算法计算的相同计划,体积学指标的差异可能超过 10%,这受到计划归一化体积、肿瘤体积、计划复杂性和部分体素体积插值的剂量梯度的影响。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/dc814bd2ae41/ACM2-24-e14070-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/57827e281a6c/ACM2-24-e14070-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/6b0cb5bf23db/ACM2-24-e14070-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/69d2058abe00/ACM2-24-e14070-g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/90c50a145cf0/ACM2-24-e14070-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/cc4895dddccd/ACM2-24-e14070-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/1ed53ec102c6/ACM2-24-e14070-g009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/53854843b9dd/ACM2-24-e14070-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/bad1b2527983/ACM2-24-e14070-g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/dc814bd2ae41/ACM2-24-e14070-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/57827e281a6c/ACM2-24-e14070-g005.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/6b0cb5bf23db/ACM2-24-e14070-g006.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/69d2058abe00/ACM2-24-e14070-g008.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/90c50a145cf0/ACM2-24-e14070-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/cc4895dddccd/ACM2-24-e14070-g003.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/1ed53ec102c6/ACM2-24-e14070-g009.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/53854843b9dd/ACM2-24-e14070-g004.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/bad1b2527983/ACM2-24-e14070-g007.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5cd8/10562029/dc814bd2ae41/ACM2-24-e14070-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
The dosimetric impact of titanium implants in spinal SBRT using four commercial treatment planning algorithms.钛植入物对脊柱 SBRT 四种商业治疗计划算法剂量学的影响。
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2023 Oct;24(10):e14070. doi: 10.1002/acm2.14070. Epub 2023 Aug 4.
2
Assessment of Monte Carlo algorithm for compliance with RTOG 0915 dosimetric criteria in peripheral lung cancer patients treated with stereotactic body radiotherapy.评估蒙特卡罗算法在接受立体定向体部放射治疗的周围型肺癌患者中符合 RTOG 0915 剂量学标准的应用。
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2016 May 8;17(3):277-293. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v17i3.6077.
3
Calculation algorithms and penumbra: Underestimation of dose in organs at risk in dosimetry audits.计算算法和半影:剂量学审核中危及器官剂量低估。
Med Phys. 2021 Oct;48(10):6184-6197. doi: 10.1002/mp.15123. Epub 2021 Aug 18.
4
Benchmarking techniques for stereotactic body radiotherapy for early-stage glottic laryngeal cancer: LINAC-based non-coplanar VMAT vs. Cyberknife planning.早期声门型喉癌立体定向体部放疗的基准技术:基于 LINAC 的非共面容积旋转调强放疗(VMAT)与 Cyberknife 计划的比较。
Radiat Oncol. 2019 Nov 4;14(1):193. doi: 10.1186/s13014-019-1404-z.
5
Volumetric modulated arc therapy treatment planning of thoracic vertebral metastases using stereotactic body radiotherapy.采用立体定向体部放疗对胸腰椎转移瘤进行容积调强弧形治疗计划。
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018 Mar;19(2):54-61. doi: 10.1002/acm2.12252. Epub 2018 Jan 19.
6
Dosimetric comparison and validation of Eclipse Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and AcurosXB (AXB) algorithms in RapidArc-based radiosurgery plans of patients with solitary brain metastasis.Eclipse各向异性分析算法(AAA)与AcurosXB(AXB)算法在基于容积旋转调强放疗的孤立性脑转移瘤患者放射外科治疗计划中的剂量学比较与验证
Med Dosim. 2022;47(1):e7-e12. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2021.09.001. Epub 2021 Nov 2.
7
Is Halcyon feasible for single thoracic or lumbar vertebral segment SBRT?单胸椎或腰椎节段 SBRT 采用 Halcyon 系统是否可行?
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022 Jan;23(1):e13458. doi: 10.1002/acm2.13458. Epub 2021 Nov 29.
8
Clinical evaluation of photon optimizer (PO) MLC algorithm for stereotactic, single-dose of VMAT lung SBRT.用于立体定向单次容积调强放疗(VMAT)肺部立体定向体部放疗(SBRT)的光子优化器(PO)多叶准直器(MLC)算法的临床评估
Med Dosim. 2020;45(4):321-326. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2020.03.004. Epub 2020 May 20.
9
Evaluation of Acuros XB algorithm based on RTOG 0813 dosimetric criteria for SBRT lung treatment with RapidArc.基于 RTOG0813 剂量学标准评价 Acuros XB 算法在立体定向体部放疗(SBRT)治疗肺部肿瘤中的 RapidArc 应用
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2014 Jan 6;15(1):4474. doi: 10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4474.
10
Dosimetric comparison of two treatment planning systems for spine SBRT.两种脊柱立体定向体部放疗治疗计划系统的剂量学比较
Med Dosim. 2020;45(1):77-84. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2019.07.001. Epub 2019 Aug 1.

引用本文的文献

1
Advantages of carbon fibre-reinforced polyetheretherketone over titanium implants in spine SBRT: a phantom evaluation.在脊柱立体定向体部放疗中,碳纤维增强聚醚醚酮相对于钛植入物的优势:一项模体评估
Phys Eng Sci Med. 2025 Jul 21. doi: 10.1007/s13246-025-01587-1.
2
Application of dose-gradient function in reducing radiation induced lung injury in breast cancer radiotherapy.剂量梯度函数在降低乳腺癌放疗中放射性肺损伤的应用。
J Xray Sci Technol. 2024;32(2):415-426. doi: 10.3233/XST-230198.

本文引用的文献

1
Assessment of dose-volume histogram precision for five clinical systems.五种临床系统的剂量-体积直方图精度评估。
Med Phys. 2022 Oct;49(10):6303-6318. doi: 10.1002/mp.15916. Epub 2022 Aug 27.
2
A Story of Hypofractionation and the Table on the Wall.一个关于大分割放疗和墙上表格的故事。
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2022 Jan 1;112(1):4-21. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.09.027.
3
Calculation algorithms and penumbra: Underestimation of dose in organs at risk in dosimetry audits.计算算法和半影:剂量学审核中危及器官剂量低估。
Med Phys. 2021 Oct;48(10):6184-6197. doi: 10.1002/mp.15123. Epub 2021 Aug 18.
4
Report dose-to-medium in clinical trials where available; a consensus from the Global Harmonisation Group to maximize consistency.在有临床研究报告剂量-介质数据的情况下报告剂量-介质;全球协调组织达成共识,以最大程度地提高一致性。
Radiother Oncol. 2021 Jun;159:106-111. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2021.03.006. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
5
Dose Calculation Comparisons between Three Modern Treatment Planning Systems.三种现代治疗计划系统之间的剂量计算比较
J Med Phys. 2020 Jul-Sep;45(3):143-147. doi: 10.4103/jmp.JMP_111_19. Epub 2020 Oct 13.
6
Accuracy of dose-volume metric calculation for small-volume radiosurgery targets.小体积放射外科靶区剂量-体积指标计算的准确性。
Med Phys. 2021 Apr;48(4):1461-1468. doi: 10.1002/mp.14645. Epub 2021 Feb 17.
7
Evaluation of dose distribution differences from five algorithms implemented in three commercial treatment planning systems for lung SBRT.对三种商业治疗计划系统中实施的五种算法用于肺部立体定向体部放疗时剂量分布差异的评估。
J Radiosurg SBRT. 2020;7(1):57-66.
8
The dosimetric impact of stabilizing spinal implants in radiotherapy treatment planning with protons and photons: standard titanium alloy vs. radiolucent carbon-fiber-reinforced PEEK systems.质子和光子放射治疗计划中稳定脊柱植入物的剂量学影响:标准钛合金与光透明碳纤维增强聚醚醚酮系统。
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2020 Aug;21(8):6-14. doi: 10.1002/acm2.12905. Epub 2020 May 31.
9
Dosimetric comparison of two treatment planning systems for spine SBRT.两种脊柱立体定向体部放疗治疗计划系统的剂量学比较
Med Dosim. 2020;45(1):77-84. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2019.07.001. Epub 2019 Aug 1.
10
Investigating the dosimetric effects of grid size on dose calculation accuracy using volumetric modulated arc therapy in spine stereotactic radiosurgery.在脊柱立体定向放射治疗中,使用容积调强弧形治疗法研究格栅尺寸对剂量计算准确性的剂量学影响。
J Radiosurg SBRT. 2017;4(4):303-313.