首页|直肠癌术后患者在Monaco计划系统中采用3种不同通量平滑方式设计容积弧形调强放射治疗计划的剂量学差异

直肠癌术后患者在Monaco计划系统中采用3种不同通量平滑方式设计容积弧形调强放射治疗计划的剂量学差异

扫码查看
目的:研究分析直肠癌术后患者在Monaco计划系统中运用通量不同的3种平滑方式对容积弧形调强放射治疗(VMAT)计划进行设计存在的剂量学差异.方法:选择2020年1月~2021年1月医院收治的25例直肠癌患者为研究对象,在优化条件相同的情况下,运用3种通量平滑方式对3组VMAT计划进行设计,即FSL组、FSM组、FSH组,然后利用Matrixx二维平板探测器进行剂量验证.同时,对靶区和危险器官剂量-体积参数进行评估,并且比较分析γ通过率、出束时间、控制点数、机器跳数、剂量梯度、均匀性指数以及适性指数之间的差异.结果:与FSH组和FSM组相比,FSL组的均匀性指数水平较低,适性指数水平较高,组间比较有差异(P<0.05);FSL组和FSM组的剂量梯度水平高于FSH组(P<0.05),但是两组的剂量梯度水平对比无统计学意义(P<0.05);FSM组和FSL组在计划靶区的D98%和Dmin提高方面优势明显,与FSH组比较差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);FSH组和FSM组的膀胱Dmean、V40以及V30均高于FSL组(P<0.05);在左侧股骨头保护方面,FSM组和FSL组明显优于FSH组(P<0.05),但是三组的肠道保护指标比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);同时,在3%/3mm标准下,3组计划的γ通过率均高于99%,与临床要求相符,而在2%/2mm和1%/1mm标准下,FSM组和FSH组的γ通过率比较接近,且比FSL组高,组间对比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05).结论:临床上在对直肠癌患者进行手术治疗后,在对VMAT计划进行制定时,FSL、FSM以及FSH 3组计划的γ通过率和剂量学参数均可以满足临床要求,但是相比较FSH和FSM而言,FSL可以减少股骨头和膀胱照射剂量和毒副反应,促进计划质量的提高,而FSM和FSH对计划执行效率的提高效果明显优于FSL.因此,在临床治疗中,应该充分考虑到患者的个体差异性,再与临床要求相结合,选择合适的放疗计划,其中FSM具有计划执行效率和计划质量高的特点,可以作为首选的一种治疗方法.
Dosimetry Differences in Volumetric Volumetric Intensity Modulated Arc Therapy Schedules Using Three Different Flux Smoothing Systems in the Monaco Planning System for Patients After Rectal Cancer
Objective:To analyze the dosimetric differences of the patients in the Monaco planning system.Methods:25 rectal cancer patients admitted to the hospital from January 2020 to January 2021 were selected for the same optimization conditions,three(Volumetric Intensity Modulated Arc Therapy,VMAT)plans,namely FSL,FSM and FSH,and then dose verified using Matrixx two-dimensional flat panel detector.The dose-volume parameters of target and organ at risk(OAR)were evaluated,and the differences between γ pass rate(GRP),tract out time(T),CP,MU,GI,HI,and CI were compared.Results:Compared with the FSH and FSM groups,lower HI levels in the FSL group,the higher level of CI,differdifference between groups(P<0.05);Higher GI levels in the FSL and FSM groups than in the FSH group(P<0.05).However,the comparison of GI levels in the two groups was not statistically significant(P<0.05);The FSM and FSL groups showed obvious advantages in D98%and Dmin improvement of PTV,compared with the FSH group was significant(P<0.05);Bladder Dmean,V40 and V30 were higher in FSH group and FSM group than in FSL group(P<0.05);In the protection of the left femoral head,the FSM group and the FSL group were significantly better than the FSH group(P<0.05).However,there was no statistical difference in the intestinal protection index among the three groups(P>0.05);At the same time,at the 3%/3mm standard,all 3 groups planned GRP was higher than 99%,in accordance with the clinical requirements.However,under the 2%/2mm and 1%/1mm standards,GRP in the FSM and FSH groups,and higher than those in the FSL group,the difference were significant(P<0.05).Conclusion:Clinically,the GRP and dosimetry parameters of FSL,FSM and FSH 3 could meet the clinical requirements,but compared with FSH and FSM,FSL could improve the plan quality.FSM and FSH were significantly better than that of FSL.Therefore,in clinical treatment,the individual differences of patients should be fully considered,and then combined with clinical requirements to choose an appropriate radiotherapy plan,in which FSM is characterized by high planned execution efficiency and plan quality,which can be used as a preferred treatment method.

rectal cancerflux smoothing modevolumetric intensity modulated arc therapyMonaco planning systemdosimetry

许章顶、黎瑶瑶

展开 >

阳江市人民医院(广东 阳江 529500)

直肠癌 通量平滑方式 容积弧形调强放射治疗 Monaco计划系统 剂量学

2024

中国医疗器械信息
中国医疗器械行业协会

中国医疗器械信息

影响因子:0.375
ISSN:1006-6586
年,卷(期):2024.30(19)