期刊文献+

食管癌调强放疗计划中AAA算法与PBC算法的对比研究 被引量:11

A Comparison of Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm(AAA) and Pencil Beam Convolution(PBC) Algorithm for IMRT Treatment Planning of Esophageal Carcioma
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:比较Varian治疗计划系统Eclipse中AAA算法和PBC算法在食管癌调强放疗中的剂量学差异。方法:选择22例中段食管癌患者,分别采用AAA算法与PBC算法设计两种调强计划,比较靶区的剂量分布,肺、脊髓和心脏等危及器官受照剂量的差异。结果:PGTV最大剂量、PTV平均剂量和左肺的平均剂量两种算法无显著性差异(P>0.05),PGTV和PTV最小剂量、PTV最大剂量、参考剂量所包靶区的体积(V95)和其他危及器官的受量,两种算法均有显著性差异(P<0.05)。结论:与PBC算法相比,AAA算法对不均匀组织的修正更加精确,对于食管癌这种与肺相关的剂量计算采用AAA算法更准确一些。 Objective: The aim of the study was to investigate the difference of Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) and Pencil Beam Convolution (PBC) Algorithm in the Eclipse planning system(Varian Medical Systems) for Esophageal Carcioma IMRT Treatment Planning. Methods: For 22 patients with esophageal carcioma, IMRT Treatment Plannings with AAA and PBC were preformed respectively. The difference of dose distribution to target and organs at risk (OAR) was compared. Results : There was no significant difference in the maximum doses of the PGTV, the mean doses of the PTV and left lung (P〉0. 05), while there was significant difference in the minimum doses of the PGTV and PTV, the maximum doses of the PTV, the percentage volume of the target receiving a dose greater than 95% of the prescription dose (V95), and the dose of other OAR (P〈0.05). Conclusions: Compared with the PBC algorithm, AAA algorithm is more exactitude to correct the asymmetry tissue, so for the esophageal carcioma, AAA algorithm is more accurate.
出处 《中国医学物理学杂志》 CSCD 2012年第1期3093-3095,共3页 Chinese Journal of Medical Physics
关键词 算法 食管癌 调强放射治疗 剂量分布 algorithm esophageal Carcioma IMRT dose distribution
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

  • 1肖锋,孙朝阳,胡明民,陆宙,刘晓莉,陆军,石梅.三维适形及调强放疗摆位误差分析[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2008,25(3):641-642. 被引量:21
  • 2Bragg C M, Wingate K, Conway J. Clinical implications of the anisotropic analytical algorithm for IMRT treatment planning and verification [J]. Radiother Oncol, 2008, 86:276-284.
  • 3Knoos T, Ceberg C, Weber L, et al. The dosimetrie verification of a pencil beam based treatment planning algorithms [J]. Phys Med Biol, 1994,39:169-1628.
  • 4Carlaprile P, Veneneia C D, Besa P. Comparison between measured and calculated dynamic wedge dose distributions using the anisotropic analytic algorithm and pencil-beam convolution [J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 2006,8:47-54. '.

二级参考文献9

  • 1Prescribing recording and reporting photon beam therapy [R]. ICRU. Report no.50. 1993.
  • 2Prescribing recording and reporting photon beam therapy (Supplement to ICRU report 50) [R]. ICRU. Report no. 62. 1999.
  • 3Van Herk M, Remeijer P, Lebesque Jr. Inclusion of geometric uncertainties in treatment plan evaluation [J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2002,52(5):1407-1422.
  • 4Mckenzie A, Van Herk M, Mijnheer B. Margins for geometric uncertainty around organs at risk in radiotherapy [J]. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 2002,62(3):299-307.
  • 5Hurkmans CW, Remeijer P, Lebesque JV, et al. Set-up verification using portal images review of current clinical practice [J]. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 2001,58(2):105-120.
  • 6Stroom JC, de Boer HC, Huizenga H, et al. Inclusion of geometrical uncertainties in radiotherapy treatment planning by means of coverage probability [J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999,43(4):905-919.
  • 7Joseph Hanley, Marc M. Debois, Dennis Mah, et al. Deep inspiration breath-hold technique for lung tumors: the potential value of target immobilization and reduced lung density in dose escalation [J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999,45(3):603-611.
  • 8Kenneth E. Rosenzweig, Joseph Hanley, Dennis Mah, et al. The deep inspiration breath-hold technique in the treatment of inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer [J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2000, 48(1): 1-87.
  • 9Joshua J. Haslam, Anthony E. Lujan, Arno J. Mundt, et al. Setup errors in patients treated with intensitymodulated whole pelvic radiation therapy for gynecological malignancies [J]. Medical Dosimetry. 2005, 30(1):36-42.

共引文献20

同被引文献62

  • 1伍然,全红,徐利明.不同算法所得IMRT计划的剂量学验证评估[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2011,28(3):2581-2583. 被引量:7
  • 2张富利,王军良,盛洪国,郑明民.PBC算法与AAA算法在肺癌调强放疗中的剂量学比较[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2011,28(3):2588-2590. 被引量:11
  • 3庄建发,管凯,田华斌,陈大朝.迭代次数对CMSXIO4.64制定鼻咽癌调强计划时子野权重优化的影响[J].实用癌症杂志,2014,29(1):48-50. 被引量:1
  • 4杨瑞杰,戴建荣,胡逸民.调强放射治疗的计划优化[J].中国医疗器械信息,2005,11(2):13-16. 被引量:19
  • 5Weiss E, Siebers JV, Kell PJ. An analysis of 6-MV versus 18- MV photon energy plans for intensity-modulated radiation th- erapy(IMRT) of lung cancer[J]. Radiother Oncol, 2007, 82(1): 52-62.
  • 6Yin Y, Chen J, Xing L, et ol. Applications of IMAT in cervical esophageal cancer radiotherapy: a comparison with fixed field IMRT in dosimetry and implementation [J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 2011, 12(2): 48-57.
  • 7Caprile PF, Venencia CD, Besa P. Comparison between meas- ured and calculated dynamic wedge dose distributions using the anisotropic analytic algorithm and pencil-beam convoluti- on [J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 2006, 8(1): 47-54.
  • 8Bragg CM, Wingate K, Conway J. Clinical implications of the a- nisotropic analytical algorithm for IMRT treatment planning a- nd verification[J]. Radiother Oncol, 2008, 86(2): 276-284.
  • 9Aarup LR, Nahum AE, Zacharatou C, et al. The effect of diffe- rent lung densities on the accuracy of various radiotherapy do- se calculation methods: implications for tumour coverage [J]. Radiother Oncol, 2009, 91(3): 405-414.
  • 10Fogliata A, Nicolini G, Vanetti E, et al. The impact of photon dose calculation algorithms on expected dose distributions in lungs under different respiratory phases [J]. Phys Med Biol, 2008, 53(9): 2375-2390.

引证文献11

二级引证文献26

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