期刊文献+

多叶准直器动态调强和静态调强方式的比较 被引量:5

Comparison between sliding window and step and shoot
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:对多叶准直器动态调强和静态调强方式进行对比性分析。方法:利用Varian 23EX直线加速器和Eclipse—Helios计划系统对5名鼻咽癌患者进行调强根治放疗。比较和分析SW和SS(并将SS按照强度分级为SS5,SS10,SS20)在总机器跳数、总治疗时间、靶区和危及器官的剂量体积参数上的差别。结果:观察剂量体积直方图(DVH)发现,在靶区剂量分布方面,SW最佳而SS5较差。在危及器官的保护上SS优于SW。利用SS治疗的总机器跳数比SW少了9%~23%,总治疗时间却是SW的2倍。结论:当强度分级在10级以上时,SS与SW的比较结果无明显差别。在质量保证方面,SS只需考虑叶片到位精度,而SW还需考虑叶片运动速度对剂量的影响,故建议用SS10方式进行调强放疗。 Objective To compare and analyze DMLC(Sliding Window, SW)and SMLC(Step and Shoot, SS)for delivering IMRT. Methods 5 patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma were treated with radical intensity modulated radiation therapy using Varian 23EX and Helios tool on a Varian Eclipse system. Different modalities to deliver IMRT were considered for Sliding Window (SW) and Step and Shoot (SS) techniques using a different number of intensity levels (e.g. 5, 10 and 20). The total beam-on-time, total delivery time and a number of dose-volume parameters regarding PTV and OARs were considered. Results Comparing with the DVH, it was found that SW was the best of the four modalities in the dose distribution of PTV, but SS was better when considering the protection of OARs. The total beam-on-time (MUs) requirement for SS was 9-23% less than SW, but the total delivery time(in minutes)was about twice as long. Cnclusion With the number of intensity level of 10 or more, no differences between SS and SW can be appreciated in the dose distribution of PTV and OARs sparing. Referring to the quality assurance, only leaf position needed to be checked in SS, whereas both leaf position and leaf speed need to be checked in SW, so it is proposed to use SS10 for delivering IMRT.
出处 《医疗卫生装备》 CAS 2007年第12期59-61,共3页 Chinese Medical Equipment Journal
关键词 静态调强 动态调强 剂量-体积参数 step and shoot sliding window dose-volume parameters
  • 相关文献

参考文献8

  • 1高磊,吕庆文,李树祥.一种调强放射治疗计划系统的研究[J].医疗卫生装备,2001,22(5):24-26. 被引量:2
  • 2F L 格林尼,D L 佩基,I D 弗莱明,等.AJCC癌症分期手册[M].第6版.沈阳:辽宁科学技术出版社,2005.59-69.
  • 3Stein J, Mohan R, Wang XH, et al. Number and orientations of beams in intensity modulated radiation treatments[J]. Med Phys, 1997,24(2): 149-160.
  • 4Chen-Shou C, Maria FC, Ellen Y, et al. Delivery of intensity-modulated radiation therapy with a conventional muhileaf collimator: Comparison of dynamic and segmental methods[J]. Med Phys, 2001, 28(12):2441-2449.
  • 5Thomas L, CHUI Chen-Shou, C. Clifton L Physical and dosimetric aspects of a multileaf collimation system used in the dynamic mode for implementing intensity modulated radiotherapy[J]. Med Phys,1998, 25(10):1919-1927.
  • 6Ping X, Lynn J V. Multileaf collimator leaf sequencing algorithm for intensity modulated beams with multiple static segments[J]. Med Phys, 1998, 25(8):1424-1434.
  • 7Potter L D, Chang S X, Cullip T J, et al. A quality and efficiency analysis of the IMFAST segmentation algorithm in head and neck “step & shoot”IMRT treatments[J]. Med Phys,2002,29(3):275-283.
  • 8Parham A, Patrick DH, Randi W, et al. Comparison of dynamic and step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy planning and delivery[J]. Med Dosi, 2004,29(1):1-6.

二级参考文献1

  • 1高磊.强度可调的适形放射治疗系统的研究.第一军医大学硕士毕业论文[M].,1999..

共引文献1

同被引文献31

  • 1马金利,蒋国梁,傅小龙,廖源,吴开良,周莉钧.窄带野胶片检查在多叶准直器质量保证中作用探讨[J].中华放射肿瘤学杂志,2004,13(2):123-127. 被引量:10
  • 2孙朝阳,肖锋,石梅,魏丽春,陆军.Varian多叶准直器(MLC)常规测量方法及质量保证[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2005,22(6):697-698. 被引量:10
  • 3马栋辉,张国庆,刘浩,许素玲.鼻咽癌动态和静态调强方式的剂量学比较[J].新疆医科大学学报,2007,30(4):393-395. 被引量:1
  • 4朱健,尹勇,卢洁,刘同海.多叶光栅静态调强与动态调强的比较[J].山东医药,2007,47(27):119-120. 被引量:2
  • 5Rangel A,Palte G,Dunscombe P.The sensitivity of patient specific IMRT QC to systematic MLC leaf bank offset errors[J].Med Phys,2010,37(7):3862-3867.
  • 6Mu G,Ludium E,Xia P.Impact of MLC leaf position errors on simple and complex IMRT plans for head and neck cancer[J].Phys Med Biol,2008,53(1):77-88.
  • 7Sumida I,Yamaguchi H,Kizaki H,et al.Quality assurance of MLC leaf position accuracy and relative dose effect at the MLC abutment region using an electronic portal imaging device[J].J Radiat Res,2012,53(5):798-806.
  • 8Yan G,Liu C,Simon TA,et al.On the sensitivity of patient-specific IMRT QA to MLC position errors[J].J Appl Clin Med Phys,2009,10(1):2915.
  • 9Rangel A,Palte G,Dunscombe P.The sensiticity of patient specific IMRT QC to systematic MLC leaf bank offset errors[J].Med Phys,2010,37(7):3862-3867.
  • 10Garcia-Vicente F,Fernandez V,Bermudez R,et al.Sensitivity of a helical diode array device to delivery errors in IMRT treatment and establishment of tolerance level for pretreatment QA[J].J Appl Clin Med Phys,2012,13(1):3660.

引证文献5

二级引证文献16

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部