肿瘤基础与临床
腫瘤基礎與臨床
종류기출여림상
JOURNAL OF BASIC AND CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
2015年
2期
118-120
,共3页
食管癌%静态调强放疗%容积调强弧形治疗%剂量
食管癌%靜態調彊放療%容積調彊弧形治療%劑量
식관암%정태조강방료%용적조강호형치료%제량
esophageal cancer%static intensity-modulate radiotherapy%volumetric modulated arc therapy%dosi-ology
目的：研究食管癌患者应用静态调强放疗（ sIMRT）和容积调强弧形治疗（ VMAT）的计划剂量学差异。方法65例食管癌单纯放疗患者分别设计sIMRT、VMAT 2组计划，比较2组的剂量学参数。结果与sIMRT比较，VMAT计划的GTV的D99、D95、Dmean的剂量较低（ P＜0.05）；PTV的99％、95％的覆盖度、最大剂量较高（P＜0.05）；PTV的105％覆盖度较低（P＜0.05）；适形指数、不均匀指数相似（P＞0.05）。危及器官比较中，VMAT的双肺V20、V30、平均剂量明显低于sIMRT（P＜0.05）。脊髓、心脏照射量2组相似（P＞0.05）。sIMRT、VMAT的射线数分别为572.33±97.9、754.95±177.6，sIMRT相比于 VMAT降低了24％（P＜0.05）。结论与sIMRT相比较，VMAT可以改善靶区剂量，减少照射时间，在食管癌的治疗中可能会有较好的疗效。
目的：研究食管癌患者應用靜態調彊放療（ sIMRT）和容積調彊弧形治療（ VMAT）的計劃劑量學差異。方法65例食管癌單純放療患者分彆設計sIMRT、VMAT 2組計劃，比較2組的劑量學參數。結果與sIMRT比較，VMAT計劃的GTV的D99、D95、Dmean的劑量較低（ P＜0.05）；PTV的99％、95％的覆蓋度、最大劑量較高（P＜0.05）；PTV的105％覆蓋度較低（P＜0.05）；適形指數、不均勻指數相似（P＞0.05）。危及器官比較中，VMAT的雙肺V20、V30、平均劑量明顯低于sIMRT（P＜0.05）。脊髓、心髒照射量2組相似（P＞0.05）。sIMRT、VMAT的射線數分彆為572.33±97.9、754.95±177.6，sIMRT相比于 VMAT降低瞭24％（P＜0.05）。結論與sIMRT相比較，VMAT可以改善靶區劑量，減少照射時間，在食管癌的治療中可能會有較好的療效。
목적：연구식관암환자응용정태조강방료（ sIMRT）화용적조강호형치료（ VMAT）적계화제량학차이。방법65례식관암단순방료환자분별설계sIMRT、VMAT 2조계화，비교2조적제량학삼수。결과여sIMRT비교，VMAT계화적GTV적D99、D95、Dmean적제량교저（ P＜0.05）；PTV적99％、95％적복개도、최대제량교고（P＜0.05）；PTV적105％복개도교저（P＜0.05）；괄형지수、불균균지수상사（P＞0.05）。위급기관비교중，VMAT적쌍폐V20、V30、평균제량명현저우sIMRT（P＜0.05）。척수、심장조사량2조상사（P＞0.05）。sIMRT、VMAT적사선수분별위572.33±97.9、754.95±177.6，sIMRT상비우 VMAT강저료24％（P＜0.05）。결론여sIMRT상비교，VMAT가이개선파구제량，감소조사시간，재식관암적치료중가능회유교호적료효。
Objective To study the dosiology differences of static intensity-modulate radiotherapy( sIMRT)and volumetric modulated arc therapy( VMAT)in the esophageal cancer. Methods The sIMRT and VMAT regimens were respectively designed for 65 patients with esophageal cancer,and the dosiology parameters were compared be-tween the two groups. Results Compared with the sIMRT,the D99 ,D95 ,Dmean of GTV of the VMAT were lower( P<0. 05);the Dmax and coverage of PTV 99%,PTV 95% of the VMAT were higher(P<0. 05);the coverage of PTV 105% of the VMAT were lower(P<0. 05);the conformal index and uneven index had no significant differ-ence(P>0. 05);for the organs at risk,the V20,V30,mean dose of the VMAT were lower(P<0. 05);the spinal dose and heart had no significant difference(P>0. 05). The ray number of the sIMRT and the VMAT were respec-tively 572. 33 ± 97. 9 and 754. 95 ± 177. 6,compared with the sIMRT,the VMAT was decreased by 24%( P <0. 05). Conclusion Compared with sIMRT,VMAT can improve the target area dose,decrease the radiation time, have the better effect for esophageal cancer.
