期刊文献+

MLC运动误差对不同射野面积的鼻咽癌容积调强计划的影响

Impacts of MLC_(error) on the Different Beam Area of Volumetric Arc Therapy for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的 研究多叶准直器运动误差(Multi-Leaf Collimator Error,MLC_(error))对不同射野平均面积(Mean Aperture Area,MAA)的鼻咽癌容积调强的影响。方法 选取30例鼻咽癌患者为研究对象,每例患者的原始计划导出后使用Python编译,依据不同的MLC_(error)制作6组模拟计划(±0.2 mm、±0.5 mm和±1.0 mm)。对比原始计划与模拟计划的剂量学参数和验证通过率,分析MLC_(error)和MAA对计划验证的影响。其中,将鼻咽肿瘤计划靶区(Planning Target Volume,PTV)与颈部转移淋巴结肿瘤靶区通过布尔运算整合为PTV69。结果 随着MLC_(error)的变化(-1~1 mm),PTV69、原发灶高危亚临床靶区和中危亚临床靶区的剂量梯度分别为6.1、6.0、6.3%/mm(P<0.05);危及器官(Organ At Risk,OAR)的剂量梯度均高于靶区剂量梯度。脊髓、脑干、左侧腮腺、右侧腮腺、口腔和喉的剂量梯度分别为10.6、10.5、12.3、12.0、8.1、11.2%/mm(P<0.05)。在对射野面积、MLC_(error)及验证通过率关系的研究中发现,不同MAA计划的验证通过率差异随MLC_(error)的增加而增大;当MLC_(error)误差达到±1.0 mm时,不同MAA计划的验证通过率差异最大(51.7%~90.2%)。结论 相较于靶区,控制MLC_(error)更有利于OAR的保护。对于鼻咽癌等复杂的放疗计划,建议将MLC_(error)精度控制在0.5 mm以内并降低小子野使用,以保护危及器官,保证计划执行的精确度。 Objective To analyze the influence between the mean aperture area(MAA)and the multi-leaf collimator error(MLC_(error))for nasopharyngeal carcinoma volumetric modulated arc therapy.Methods 30 patients diagnosed with postoperative nasopharyngeal carcinoma were selected as the study objects.Every original plan for each patient was exported and compiled using Python.Six modified plans were generated by different MLC_(error)(±0.2 mm,±0.5 mm,±1.0 mm).The dosimetry parameters and passing rate of the original and modified plan were compared and the relationship among MLC_(error),and MAA was analyzed.Among them,the planned target volume(PTV)of nasopharyngeal tumor and the target area of cervical metastatic lymph node tumor were integrated into PTV69 by Boolean operation.Results The corresponding variation of PTV69,planning clinical target volume 1 and planning clinical target volume 2 due to MLC_(error)(-1-1 mm)were 6.1%/mm,6.0%/mm and 6.3%/mm(P<0.05).The dose gradient of the organs at risk(OAR)was higher than that of the target area.The dose fall-off were 10.6%/mm,10.5%/mm,12.3%/mm,12.0%/mm,8.1%/mm and 11.2%/mm in spinal-cord,brainstem,parotid-L,parotid-R,oral and larynx(P<0.05).With the increase of MLC_(error),the passing rate difference of different MAA plan showed an increasing trend.When the MLC_(error) reached±1.0 mm,the discrepancy of different MAA plan was largest(51.7%-90.2%).Conclusion It is more beneficial for limiting MLC_(error) value to protect OAR than target.For the complicated nasopharyngeal carcinoma,less than 0.5 mm MLC_(error) is suggested to be the operation tolerance and decreasing the the small segment is recommended to protect OAR and ensure the dose accuracy.
作者 贾晓斌 岳堃 JIA Xiaobin;YUE Kun(Department of Radiotherapy,The Shanghai Ninth People’s Hospital,Shanghai JiaoTong University School of Medicine,Shanghai 201900,China)
出处 《中国医疗设备》 2024年第3期68-72,79,共6页 China Medical Devices
基金 九院基础研究助推计划资助 上海交通大学医学院附属第九人民医院种子基金(JJZZ192)。
关键词 鼻咽癌 多叶准直器运动误差 容积调强放疗 子野平均面积 验证通过率 nasopharyngeal cancer multi-leaf collimator error volumetric modulated arc therapy mean aperture area passing rate
  • 相关文献

参考文献10

二级参考文献61

  • 1Otto K.Volumettlc modulated arc therapy:IMRT in a single gantry are [J]. Med Phys, 2008, 35 ( 1 ) : 310-317. DOI: 10. 1 118/1. 2818738.
  • 2Cozzi L,Dinshaw KA, Shrivastava SK, et al. A treatment planning study comparing volumetric arc modulation with RapidArc and fixed field IMRT for cervix uteri radiotherapy [J]. Radiother Onco1,2008,89 ( 2 ) : 180-191. DOI : 10. 1016/j, radonc. 2008.06. 013.
  • 3Verbakel WFAR, Cuijpers JP, Hoffmans D, et al. Volumetric intensity-modulated arc therapy vs.conventional IMRT in head-and- neek caneer:a comparative planning and dosimettlc study [ J].lnt J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2009,74 (1 ) : 252-259. DOI : 10. 1016/j. ijrobp.2008.12.033.
  • 4Meniven AL, Sharpe MB, Purdie TG.A new mettle for assessing IMRT modulation complexity and plan deliverability [J]. Med Phys,2010,37(2) :505-515.DOI: 10. 1 118/1.3276775.
  • 5Masi L, Doro R, Favuzza V, et al. Impact of plan parameters on the dosimetric accuracy of volumetric modulated arc therapy [ J ]. Med Phys,2013,40( 7 ) :071718.DOI: 10. 1 118/1.4810969.
  • 6Mohan R, Arnfield M, Tong SD, et al. The impact of fluctuations in intensity patterns on the number of monitor units and the quality and accuracy of intensity modulated radiotherapy [ J]. Med Phys, 2000,27(6) : 1226-1237.DOI: 10. 1 118/1.599000.
  • 7Matuszak MM, Larsen EW, Fraass BA. Reduction of IMRT beam complexity through the use of beam modulation penalties in the objective function [ J ]. Med Phys, 2007,34 ( 2 ) : 507-520. DOI : 10. 1 118/1.2409749.
  • 8Dai JR,Zhu YP. Minimizing the number of segments in a del/very sequence for intensity-modulated radiation therapy with a multileaf collimator [ J]. Med Phys, 2001,28 ( 10 ) : 2113-2120. DOI : 10. 1 118/1.1406518.
  • 9Webb S. Use of a quantitative index of beam modulation to characterize dose conformality : illustration by a comparison of full beamlet IMRT, few-segment IMRT (fsIMRT) and conformal unmodulated radiotherapy [J]. Phys Med Biol, 2003,48 (14) : 2051-2062.DOI : 10. 1 088/0031-9 155/48/14/301.
  • 10Giorgia N, Antonella F, Eugenio V, et al. What is an acceptably smoothed fluence? Dosimetric and delivery considerations for dynamic sliding window IMRT [J]. Radiat Oncol, 2007, 2: 42. DOI: 10. 1 186/1748-717X-2-42.

共引文献43

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