TiNi记忆合金环抱接骨板治疗四肢骨折

目的:探讨TiNi记忆合金治疗非负重区骨折的临床疗效.方法:采用TiNi记忆合金环抱接骨板治疗非负重区骨折54例.其中锁骨骨折28例,髌骨骨折11例,尺骨骨折7例,桡骨骨折4例,掌骨骨折2例,指骨骨折2例.结果:所有病例均获随访,时间3～8 mo,X片显示骨折均于术后8～12 wk临床愈合,采用综合评分法,优良率91%.结论:TiNi记忆合金环抱接骨板具有创伤小、手术时间短、操作简便、疗效肯定,无明显并发症,在严格掌握适应症的情况下,是四肢非负重区骨折一种理想的固定方法.     

LUNATM—260型伽玛射线立体定向回转聚焦放疗机质量控制

目的：对LUNATM—260型伽玛射线立体定向回转聚焦放疗机（简称伽玛刀）的质量控制,以确保设备的机械精度和剂量的准确度。方法：按照GBZ 168—2005《X、γ射线头部立体定向外科治疗放射卫生防护标准》的要求的检测项目、检测方法对设备性能进行了全面检定。结果：各项指标符合国家标准。结论：定期对伽马刀进行质量控制与质量保证,对保证设备精度,对患者实施安全、准确地放射治疗有重要意义。     

肺部小肿瘤γ刀照射与三维适形及调强放疗计划的剂量学比较

目的 对肺部小肿瘤的γ刀照射计划与三维适形、调强放疗计划进行剂量学比较,评估其优缺点.方法 选择14例肺部小肿瘤患者分别做γ刀照射计划(计划1)及5个野三维适形(计划2)、调强放疗计划(计划3),使计划靶体积(PTV)与95%PTV的剂量一致,分析各计划PTV的适形指数(CI)、均匀指数(HI),肺接受5～30 Gy照射体积占全肺体积百分比(V5、V10、V20、V30),以及食管及脊髓最大受照剂量.3个计划间两两比较采用配对t检验.结果 1、2、3计划的CI值分别为0.58、0.46、0.63[计划1＞计划2(t=-3.95,P=0.000),计划3＞计划2(t=-6.01,P=0.000),计划1=计划3(t=1.64,P=0.116)];HI值分别为1.66、1.10、1.07[计划1＞计划2、计划1＞计划3(t=-20.52、21.41,P均=0.000),计划2=计划3(t=-1.08,P=0.294)].双肺V5、V10、V20、V30在计划1中均最小(10.0%、5.6%、2.4%、1.2%),计划3次之(20.2%、13.4%、6.9%、3.0%),计划2最大(26.5%、18.0%、11.4%、4.6%);计划1＜计划2(t=9.68、8.41、5.45、5.14,P均=0.000),计划1＜计划3(t=7.58、8.95、6.15、4.78,P均=0.000),计划2＞计划3(t=9.71、5.91、4.13、3.91,P均=0.000).计划1、2、3的食管最大受量分别为(24.93±21.54)、(31.90±18.75)、(29.19±23.09)Gy,计划1＜计划2(t=-2.71,P=0.013)、计划1=计划3(t=-1.49,P=0.152),计划2=计划3(t=1.35,P=0.193);脊髓最大受量分别为(12.07±10.67)、(17.70±11.35)、(8.92±10.04)Gy,计划2＞计划1＞计划3(t=-2.38、2.29、4.83,P=0.1027、0.033、0.000);每个病灶的3个计划均满足食管最大剂量≤60 Gy、脊髓最大剂量≤40 Gy要求.结论 肺部小肿瘤γ刀照射计划与三维适形、调强放疗计划比较,其对肺的损伤最小,但靶区均匀性较差、脊髓最大受量较调强放疗计划高.

Abstract：

Objective To compare dose distribution in gamma knife radiotherapy plan, conformal radiotherapy(CRT)plan and intensity modulated radiotherapy(MRT)plan for patients with small mass in lung, and evaluate their characters. Methods Fourteen patients with small mass in lung participated in the study. Gamma knife radiotherapy plan(plan 1), CRT plan(plan 2)and IMRT plan(plan 3)were made for each mass. The planning target volume(PTV)and the dose include 95% PTV were consistent.Conformal index(CI), homogeneity index(HI), lung V5 ,V10 ,V20 ,V30 and the max dose of esophagus and spinal cord were analyzed. Paired samples t-test was used for comparison between each two plans. Results The CI of the plan 1,2 and 3 were 0. 58,0. 46 and 0. 63, respectively. CI of the plan 1 ＞ that of the plan 2 (t= -3.95,P =0.000),plan 3 ＞ plan 2(t = -6.01 ,P =0.000),plan 1 =plan 3(t =1.64,P =0.116);HI of the plan 1,2 and 3 were 1.66,1.10 and 1.07 respectively. HI of the plan 1 ＞ plan 2 ,plan 1 ＞ plan 3(t= -20.52,21.41 respectively, both P=0. 000),plan 2 = plan 3(t= -1.08,P=0.294). The wholelung V5 ,V10 ,V20 and V30 were 10.0% ,5.6% ,2. 4% and 1.2%, respectively, in plan 1 ;20. 2% ,13. 4%,6. 9% ,3.0%, respectively, in plan 3; and 26. 5%, 18. 0%, 11.4% and 4. 6%, respectively, in plan 2.The V5, V10, V20 and V 30 of the plan 1 ＜ in plan 2(t = 9. 68,8. 41,5. 45,5. 14, all P = 0. 000), the V5,V10,V20 and V30 of the plan 1 ＜ in plan 3(t=7.58,8.95,6. 15,4.78, respectively, all P=0.000),the V5 ,V10, V20andV30 oftheplan2 ＞ inplan3(t =9. 71,5. 91,4. 13,3.91, respectively, allP =0.000).The max dose of esophagus in plan 1 ,2 and 3 were 24.93 ± 21.54, 31.90 ± 18. 75, 29. 19 ± 23.09 Gy,respectively, plan 1 ＜ plan 2(t = -2. 71 ,P=0.013),plan 1 = plan 3(t = - 1.49,P =0. 152),plan 2 =plan 3(t = 1.35, P = 0. 193). The max dose of spinal cord in plan 1,2 and 3 were 12.07 ± 10. 67,17.70 ±11.35 and 8.92 :± 10. 04 Gy, respectively, plan 2 ＞ plan 1 ＞plan 3(t = -2. 38,2. 29,4. 83,P=0. 1027,0.033,0.000);All three plans of each mass meet the needs that the max dose of the esophagus≤60 Gy and the max dose of spinal cord ≤40 Gy. Conclusions The dose of the normal lung was lower, but the HI and the max dose of spinal cord were higher in Gamma knife radiotherapy plan than those in the CRT and the IMRT plan of the small mass in lung.     

锥形束CT图像与计划CT图像配准方法分析

目的:通过我院开展图像引导放射治疗(IGRT)技术以来,治疗的头颈部、胸部及腹部等不同位的肿瘤的配准结果比较分析影响图像配准的各种因素及图像配准时应注意的问题,并对患者体模的制作及技术员的摆位提出改进意见。方法:病人采用平卧位,塞块式体板或颈肩板加热塑膜固定,行KVCBCT扫描,在VARIAN4DITC工作站上采用自动和手动图像配准,对于同一病例由不同人员来进行配准。结果:头颈部图像配准结果好于胸腹部配准结果,不同人员配准结果不同。结论:头颈部配准中采用自动配准一般就可达到要求,胸腹部配准采用自动和手动两种配准方法;采用人工配准方法时人员是影响配准结果的重要因素之一,图像配准最好由临床医生来确定;患者位置重复性是决定配准结果的另一重要因素,要求定位、摆位时保证患者体位姿势尽量保持一致;图像配准中最好以骨性标识或变化不大的器官作为配准点。