Objective： The work is a comparative study between two modalities of radiation therapy, the aim of which is to compare 3D conformal radiation therapy （3D-CRT） and intensity modulated radiation therapy （IMRT） in t...Objective： The work is a comparative study between two modalities of radiation therapy, the aim of which is to compare 3D conformal radiation therapy （3D-CRT） and intensity modulated radiation therapy （IMRT） in treating posterior fossa boost in children with high risk medulloblastorna; dosimetrically evaluating and comparing both techniques as regard target coverage and doses to organs at risk （OAR）. Methods： Twenty patients with high risk medulloblastoma were treated by 3D-CRT technique. A dosimetric comparison was done by performing two plans for the posterior fossa boost, 3D-CRT and IMRT plans, for the same patient using Eclipse planning system （version 8.6）. Results： IMRT had a better conformity index compared to 3D-CRT plans （P value of 0.000）. As for the dose homogeneity it was also better in the IMRT plans, yet it hasn＇t reached the statistical significant value. Also, doses received by the cochleae, brainstem and spinal cord were significantly less in the IMRT plans than those of 3D-CRT （P value 〈 0.05）. Conclusion： IMRT technique was clearly able to improve conformity and homogeneity index, spare the cochleae, reduce dose to the brainstem and spinal cord in comparison to 3D- CRT technique.展开更多
文摘Objective： The work is a comparative study between two modalities of radiation therapy, the aim of which is to compare 3D conformal radiation therapy （3D-CRT） and intensity modulated radiation therapy （IMRT） in treating posterior fossa boost in children with high risk medulloblastorna; dosimetrically evaluating and comparing both techniques as regard target coverage and doses to organs at risk （OAR）. Methods： Twenty patients with high risk medulloblastoma were treated by 3D-CRT technique. A dosimetric comparison was done by performing two plans for the posterior fossa boost, 3D-CRT and IMRT plans, for the same patient using Eclipse planning system （version 8.6）. Results： IMRT had a better conformity index compared to 3D-CRT plans （P value of 0.000）. As for the dose homogeneity it was also better in the IMRT plans, yet it hasn＇t reached the statistical significant value. Also, doses received by the cochleae, brainstem and spinal cord were significantly less in the IMRT plans than those of 3D-CRT （P value 〈 0.05）. Conclusion： IMRT technique was clearly able to improve conformity and homogeneity index, spare the cochleae, reduce dose to the brainstem and spinal cord in comparison to 3D- CRT technique.
