| 摘要: |
| 目的探讨脑转移瘤同期推量适形放疗与调强放疗的剂量学差异。方法选择在本院放疗的41例脑转移瘤患者为对象，分别设计全脑照射联合局部同期推量治疗的2种放疗计划，即三维适形放疗计划（3DCRT）、调强放疗计划（IMRT），处方给量为全脑3000cGy/10次+转移瘤同期推量4000cGy/10次；比较并分析2种放疗计划的靶区适形度（CN）、靶区均匀指数（HI）和机器跳数（MU）。结果2种放疗计划均能满足临床要求；在CN方面，IMRT明显优于3DCRT（P＜0.05）；在HI、MU方面，3DCRT明显优于IMRT（均P＜0.05）。2个转移瘤且无共层和3~4个转移瘤且有共层的情况下，IMRT与3DCRT在CN方面比较差异无统计学意义（P＞0.05），3DCRT在HI、MU方面均优于IMRT（均P＜0.05）；3个转移瘤且无共层的情况下，3DCRT与IMRT在CN、HI方面比较差异均无统计学意义（均P＞0.05）；3DCRT在MU方面优于IMRT（P＜0.05）。结论2种放疗计划均能满足临床要求。在某些特定情况下，如2~3个转移瘤且无共层或3~4个转移瘤且有共层，3DCRT较优。 |
| 关键词: 同期推量 适形放疗 调强放疗 剂量学 |
| DOI：10.12056/j.issn.1006-2785.2017.39.01.2016-1260 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目:台州市科技计划项目（1402ky10） |
|
| Dosimetric study of 3DCRT and IMRT for whole-brain radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost to brain metastases |
|
NI Lingqin, YING Shenpeng, LIU Yanmei, WANG Yong, WU Zhaoxia
|
|
Taizhou Central Hospital
|
| Abstract: |
| Objective To investigate the dosimetric differences of 3DCRT and IMRT for whole-brain radiotherapy with simultaneous integrated boost to brain metastases. Methods Forty one previously treated cancer patients with brain metastases were replanned using 3DCRT and IMRT, respectively. The prescription dose was 3000cGy/10 fractions for whole brain (PTV), and 4000cGy/10 fractions for individual brain metastases (PGTV) simultaneously. The conformation number (CN) and homogeneity index (HI) of the target, and the monitor units (MU) were compared. Results Both treatment plans met the clinical requirements. The target dose conformity of IMRT was better than that of 3DCRT (P＜0.05). The homogeneity index and
monitor units of 3DCRT were better than those of IMRT (P＜0.05). For the cases with 2 metastases which were not on the same slice, and 3 or 4 metastases which were on the same slice, there was no statistical difference in the target dose conformity between 3DCRT and IMRT(P ＞0.05), while the homogeneity index and monitor units of 3DCRT was better than IMRT(P＜0.05). For the cases with 3 metastases which were not on the same slice, there was no statistical difference in the target dose conformity and homogeneity index between 3DCRT and IMRT (P ＞0.05), while the monitor units of 3DCRT was better than that of IMRT (P＜0.05). Conclusion Two types of plans can satisfy the clinical requirements. Under some special conditions, such as 2 or 3 metastases which were not on the same slice, or 3 or 4 metastases which were on the same slice, the 3DCRT plan is better. |
| Key words: Simultaneous integrated boost 3DCRT IMRT Dosimetry |
