首页|子野数限值对左乳腺癌根治术后调强放疗计划的剂量学影响

子野数限值对左乳腺癌根治术后调强放疗计划的剂量学影响

扫码查看
目的 探讨子野数限值对左乳腺癌根治术后调强放疗(IMRT)计划的剂量学影响,以寻求最优的子野数限值。方法 回顾性分析2022年3月1日至2023年3月31日该院收治的30例左乳腺癌根治术后放疗患者的临床资料,所有患者均使用Oncentra 4。3计划系统设计5种IMRT计划,子野数限值分别为15、25、35、45、55(所有IMRT计划根据子野数限值命名,其余优化参数和目标函数相同),统计5种计划的计划靶体积(PTV)剂量学参数、危及器官(OAR)受量和机器跳数并比较分析。结果 不同子野数限值IMRT计划的PTV D2%(F=104。439,P<0。05)、D98%(F=20。748,P<0。05)、Dmean(F=89。578,P<0。05)、均匀度(HI,F=101。794,P<0。05)和适形指数(CI,F=26。453,P<0。05)均有明显差异,左肱骨头V50(F=76。991,P<0。05)有明显差异,其余OAR无明显差异(P>0。05)。plan35的PTV D2%、D98%、Dmean、CI和HI值均优于plan15和plan25,差异有统计学意义(P<0。05)。与plan35相比,plan45和plan55的PTV D98%和CI值无明显差异(P>0。05);PTV D2%、Dmean和HI值更低,差异有统计学意义(P<0。05)。plan15和plan25的左肱骨头V50偏高,不能满足临床要求,plan35、plan45和plan55均能较好地保护OAR,且OAR受量之间无明显差异(P>0。05)。plan35的机器跳数低于plan45和plan55,差异有统计学意义(P<0。05)。结论 子野数限值为35时,PTV剂量分布和OAR受量满足临床剂量学要求,同时机器跳数更低,可作为左侧乳腺癌根治术后IMRT计划设计的参考值。
Effect of limiting value of subfield number on dosimetry of intensity-modulated radiotherapeutic plan for left-breast radical mastectomy
Objective To investigate the effect of the limiting value of subfield number on the dosime-try of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) plan for left-breast radical mastectomy in order to seek the optimal limiting value of subfield number.Methods The clinical data of 30 patients with left-breast radical mastectomy in this hospital from March 1,2022 to March 31,2023 were retrospectively analyzed.All patients used the Oncentra 4.3 planning system to design 5 kinds of IMRT plans,and the limiting values of subfield number were 15,25,35,45 and 55 respectively (all IMRT plans were named according to the subfield number limiting value,the other optimization parameters and objective function were the same),planning target vol-ume (PTV) dosimetric parameters,organ at risk (OAR) receiving dosage and monitor units were statistically analyzed and compared.Results The PTV D2% (F=104.439,P<0.05),D98% (F=20.748,P<0.05),Dmean (F=89.578,P<0.05),homogeneity index (HI,F=101.794,P<0.05) and conformity index (CI,F=26.453,P<0.05) among different subfields number limiting values of IMRT had statistical differences,the left side humeral head V50 (F=76.991,P<0.05) had significant difference and the other OAR had no signifi-cant difference (P>0.05).The PTV D2%,D98%,Dmean,CI and HI values of plan35 were significantly superior to those of plan15 and plan25,and the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05).Compared with plan35,there were no statistically significant difference in PTV D98% and CI of plan45 and plan55 (P>0.05),while the PTV D2%,Dmean and HI were lower,and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).The V50 of left humeral head in plan15 and plan25 were too high to meet the clinical request.The plan35,plan45 and plan55 could protect the OAR well,moreover there were no significant difference in the receiving dosage of the OAR (P>0.05).The monitor units of plan35 was lower than that of plan45 and plan55,and the difference was statistically significant (P<0.05).Conclusion When the limiting value of subfield number is 35,the dose distribution of PTV and OAR receiving dosage meet the clinical dosimetric requirements,meanwhile the monitor units is lower,which can be used as a reference value for the IMPT plan design for left-breast cancer radical mastecto-my.

intensity-modulated radiation therapylimiting value of subfield numberbreast cancerdosimetry

刘映、张惠玲、阳萍、饶岚

展开 >

资阳市第一人民医院肿瘤中心,四川资阳 641300

调强放疗 子野数限值 乳腺癌 剂量学

资阳市医学科学课题

KY2023026

2024

重庆医学
重庆市卫生信息中心,重庆市医学会

重庆医学

CSTPCD
影响因子:1.797
ISSN:1671-8348
年,卷(期):2024.53(8)
  • 27