Koswig S, Dinges S, Buchali A, Böhmer D, Salk J, Rosenthal P, Harder C, Schlenger L, Budach V
Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Charité, Humboldt-Universität Berlin.
Strahlenther Onkol. 1999 Jan;175(1):10-6. doi: 10.1007/BF02743455.
Four different three-dimensional planning techniques for localized radiotherapy of prostate cancer were compared with regard to dose homogeneity within the target volume and dose to organs at risk, dependent upon tumor stage.
Six patients with stage T1, 7 patients with stage T2 and 4 patients with stage T3 were included in this study. Four different 3D treatment plans (rotation, 4-field, 5-field and 6-field technique) were calculated for each patient. Dose was calculated with the reference point at the isocenter (100%). The planning target volume was encompassed within the 95% isodose surface. All the techniques used different shaped portal for each beam. Dose volume histograms were created and compared for the planning target volume and the organs at risk (33%, 50%, 66% volume level) in all techniques.
The 4 different three-dimensional planning techniques revealed no differences concerning dose homogeneity within the planning target volume. The dose volume distribution at organs at risk show differences between the calculated techniques. In our study the best protection for bladder and rectum in stage T1 and T2 was achieved by the 6-field technique. A significant difference was achieved between 6-field and 4-field technique only in the 50% volume of the bladder (p = 0.034), between the 6-field and rotation technique (all volume levels) and between 5-field and rotation technique (all volume levels). In stage T1, T2 6-field and 4-field technique in 50% (p = 0.033) and 66% (p = 0.011) of the rectum volume. In stage T3 a significant difference was not observed between the 4 techniques. The best protection of head of the femur was achieved by the rotation technique.
In the localized radiotherapy of prostate cancer in stage T1 or T2 the best protection for bladder and rectum was achieved by a 3D-planned conformal 6-field technique. If the seminal vesicles have been included in the target volume and in the case of large planning target volume other techniques should be taken for a better protection for organs at risk e. g. a 3D-planned 4-field technique box technique.
比较四种不同的前列腺癌局部放疗三维计划技术在靶区内剂量均匀性以及危及器官剂量方面的差异,这些差异取决于肿瘤分期。
本研究纳入了6例T1期患者、7例T2期患者和4例T3期患者。为每位患者计算了四种不同的三维治疗计划(旋转技术、四野技术、五野技术和六野技术)。剂量计算以等中心处的参考点为100%。计划靶区包含在95%等剂量面内。所有技术对每个射野均使用不同形状的射野。为所有技术中的计划靶区和危及器官(33%、50%、66%体积水平)创建并比较剂量体积直方图。
四种不同的三维计划技术在计划靶区内的剂量均匀性方面未显示出差异。危及器官的剂量体积分布在计算的技术之间存在差异。在我们的研究中,六野技术在T1期和T2期对膀胱和直肠提供了最佳保护。仅在膀胱50%体积时,六野技术与四野技术之间存在显著差异(p = 0.034),在六野技术与旋转技术之间(所有体积水平)以及五野技术与旋转技术之间(所有体积水平)存在显著差异。在T1期、T2期,六野技术与四野技术在直肠50%(p = 0.033)和66%(p = 0.011)体积时存在显著差异。在T3期,四种技术之间未观察到显著差异。旋转技术对股骨头提供了最佳保护。
在T1期或T2期前列腺癌的局部放疗中,三维计划的适形六野技术对膀胱和直肠提供了最佳保护。如果精囊已包含在靶区内且计划靶区较大,应采用其他技术以更好地保护危及器官,例如三维计划四野技术盒式技术。