摘要
目的通过CT治疗计划系统(CT-TPS)与电子射野影像装置(EPID)在头颈部肿瘤首次放疗摆位中的误差对比分析,讨论两种方法在位置验证中的精确性,进一步做好基层放疗单位的质量保证和质量控制。方法选取2015年5月‐2016年12月接受放射治疗的头颈部肿瘤患者37例,首次治疗摆位同时采用CT-TPS与EPID进行位置验证,比较两种方法在左右方向X、头脚方向Y及前后方向Z的误差。结果 CT-TPS与EPID两种方法在患者X、Y及Z 3个方向上的线性误差虽稍有差别,但差异无统计学意义(均P>0.05)。结论 CT-TPS与EPID两种位置验证方法均能准确提供误差数值,满足临床要求。对于基层放疗单位,两种方法可以联合使用,也可单独使用,CT-TPS位置验证在EPID出现故障时可以替代EPID。
【Objective】To compare and analyze the errors between computed tomography-treatment planning system（CTTPS） and electronic portal imaging device（EPID） in first treatment setup of head and neck tumors, to discuss the accuracy of the two methods in position verification, to further improve the quality assurance and quality control of the primary radiotherapy units. 【Methods】Thirty-seven head and neck cancer patients who accepted radiotherapy were selected from May 2015 to December 2016, CT-TPS and EPID were used for position verification in setup of first treatment, errors in lateral-X, longitudinal-Y and vertical-Z direction of two methods were compared.【Results】Linear errors in X, Y, Z directions between CT-TPS and EPID were slightly different, P values were all greater than 0.05, no significant difference existed.【Conclusion】Two position verification methods of CT-TPS and EPID can provide accurate numerical errors value and meet clinical requirements. For primary radiotherapy units, two methods can be used in combination or alone, CT-TPS position verification can replace EPID when EPID fails.
作者
王艳霞
蒋社伟
张胜
WANG Yanxia;JIANG Shewei;ZHANG Sheng(Department of Radiation Oncology, Central Hospital of Jiaozuo Coal Group, Jiaozuo, Henan 454000, Chin)
出处
《中国医学工程》
2018年第4期40-43,共4页
China Medical Engineering
关键词
CT治疗计划系统
电子射野影像装置
头颈部肿瘤
放疗摆位
computed tomography-treatment planning system
electronic portal imaging device
head and neck tumor
radiotherapy setup
