胸上段食管癌断层定野与断层螺旋放疗和容积旋转调强放疗的剂量学比较

目的 比较胸上段食管癌断层定野放疗（TD）、断层螺旋放疗（HT）和容积旋转调强放疗（VMAT）的剂量学差异,为临床上食管癌放疗方式的选择提供依据。方法 选取15例临床分期为cT_2~4N_0~1M₀的胸上段食管癌患者,分别设计TD、HT和VMAT 3种计划。比较靶区的剂量体积直方图（DVH）、均匀指数（HI）、适形指数（CI）、危及器官（OAR）受量、治疗时间和机器跳数（MU）的差异。结果 HT和TD计划的D₂和D_mean均明显低于VMAT计划;TD计划的D₉₈和HT相似,但均高于VMAT计划。对于HI,HT < TD < VMAT,3组之间差异有统计学意义（F=81.603,P < 0.05）。3组计划的CI差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。双肺的V₁₅,HT明显高于VMAT和TD （t=3.547、-2.626,P < 0.05）。TD计划的V₂₀与HT计划的相似,但高于VMAT计划（t=2.824、3.052, P < 0.05）。3组计划中的脊髓D_max无明显差异。HT和TD的执行时间、MU均高于VMAT,差异具有统计学意义（t=21.617、15.693、10.018、7.802,P < 0.05）。结论 与VMAT相比,HT和TD计划可明显改善胸上段食管癌靶区的剂量分布,可获得更好的适形度。但VMAT比HT或TD明显降低双肺V₂₀、MU及治疗时间。TD与HT相比,HT的靶区剂量分布更好,但TD降低了双肺的V₁₅,且缩短治疗时间。     

胸上段食管癌螺旋断层放疗和容积旋转调强放疗的剂量学比较

目的 比较胸上段食管癌螺旋断层(HT)与容积旋转调强放疗(VMAT)计划的剂量学差异。方法 随机抽样法选取10例胸上段食管癌患者,分别设计HT和VMAT双弧照射调强放疗计划,肿瘤靶区体积(GTV)给予66 Gy/30次,计划靶区体积(PTV)给予50 Gy/30次。根据剂量体积直方图(DVH)评价靶区的D_1%、D_5%、D_95%、D_99%、适形指数(CI)、均匀性指数(HI)和危及器官(OAR)受量,比较治疗时间和机器跳数(MU)的差异。结果 HT组GTV和PTV的D_99%高于VMAT组(t=4.476、3.756,P<0.05);GTV与PTV的D_1%、D_5%、D_95%、HI和CI差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。HT组全肺V₁₀、V₁₅、V₂₀和全肺平均剂量(MLD)均显著低于VMAT组(t=-3.369、-4.824、-4.869、-3.657,P<0.05);全肺V₅、V₃₀和脊髓D_max差异均无统计学意义(P >0.05)。HT组治疗时间和MU数均远大于VMAT组(t=13.970、7.982,P<0.05)。结论 HT与VMAT技术均能满足胸上段食管癌放疗剂量要求。HT技术能显著减小双肺受量,而VMAT技术具备明显的效率优势。     

准直器角度对胸上段食管癌容积旋转调强放疗剂量的影响

目的 研究不同准直器角度对胸上段食管癌病例的剂量影响。方法 选择8例胸上段食管癌病例作为研究对象,每个病例设计准直器角度为0°、5°、10°、15°、20°、25°、30°、35°、40°和45°的10个容积旋转调强放疗（VMAT）计划,比较不同角度下的靶区和危及器官各剂量参数以及总机器跳数。结果 通过比较10组不同准直器角度计划的各项指标结果,选取整体表现最佳的20°组和临床上使用较多的0°及45°组进行分析,显示正常组织全肺V₁₀、V₁₅和V₃₀差异有统计学意义（F=5.328、8.033、28.424,P < 0.05）,脊髓D_max和总机器跳数MU差异有统计学意义（F=9.608、4.464,P < 0.05）。其他指标差异无统计学意义（P > 0.05）。结论 在胸上段食管癌VMAT计划设计时,选择合适的准直器角度可以保证靶区剂量分布,减少危及器官受量,能更好地保护正常组织,并提高治疗效率。     

不同调强方式在胸中上段食管癌放疗中的剂量学研究

目的 对胸中上段食管癌患者进行静态调强（IMRT）和容积旋转调强（VMAT）两种放疗方式的剂量学对比研究。方法 对20例IMRT治疗的食管癌患者行VMAT（单弧和双弧）计划的重新设计。在单弧的VMAT计划中,对其中5例患者行不同子野间隔（4°、3°、2°）以及不同计划系统（Monaco和MasterPlan）的计划设计。比较靶区和危及器官（OAR）的剂量学差异及治疗参数。结果 双弧VMAT计划各项靶区剂量学参数明显好于IMRT计划和单弧VMAT计划（P<0.05）,靶区均匀性（HI）（P<0.05）和适形度（CI）（P<0.05）最好。危及器官参数VMAT可在一定程度上降低OAR的受照剂量,但是IMRT对肺组织和正常组织（E-P）的低剂量保护要优于VMAT（P<0.05）;不同子野间隔的VMAT计划中,2°相对于3°和4°其OAR的受照剂量是减小的（P<0.05）,除了心脏的D_mean;不同计划系统设计的VMAT计划,以Monaco对OAR的保护为最优（P<0.05）;VMAT的机器跳数少于IMRT,而且有效节省了治疗时间。 结论 VMAT方式相对于IMRT能够实现更好的靶区覆盖、均匀性和适形度,同时能降低脊髓、肺组织、心脏和E-P的受照剂量;对于VMAT来说,双弧技术、小子野角度间隔能够进一步地改善靶区和OAR的受照剂量;此外,在物理参数和优化参数一致的前提下,Monaco可以更好地保护OAR。     

螺旋断层固定野和旋转调强放疗技术在全身照射中的应用对比研究

目的 探究使用螺旋断层固定野调强（TD）和螺旋断层旋转调强（HT）放射治疗技术在全身照射（TBI）中的应用对比,并评估TD治疗技术下计划的质量和执行效率,指导临床选择最佳的计划设计方案。方法 对郑州大学第一附属医院收治的8例身高在120 cm左右的已行TBI的急性白血病患者进行回顾性研究,分别选择TD和HT治疗技术进行计划设计,其中TD分别设计2~12内奇数个均分射野的计划,且起始角度分别从180°和0°开始,其余计划参数都保持一致。最后对设计好的计划剂量分布进行统计,比较TD与HT治疗技术下的计划在靶区的平均剂量（PTV_Dmean）、均匀性指数（HI）和危及器官（OARs）受量,以评估计划质量,并比较治疗出束时间以评估治疗效率。结果 9野的TD计划相对于HT计划在PTV_Dmean和靶区HI能达到一致效果,差异无统计学意义。但TD<9野的计划相对于HT计划在PTV_Dmean（t=-3.12、-5.41、-20.33、-4.56、-7.22、-11.27,P<0.05）和靶区HI（t=-2.94、-5.18、-15.66、-4.31、-5.51、-9.13,P<0.05）无剂量学优势,差异有统计学意义。同时TD计划中起始角度对PTV_Dmean和靶区HI没有影响。在危及器官方面,≥ 7野TD计划与HT计划在左肺平均剂量与右肺平均剂量差异无统计学意义;左眼晶状体计划危及体积（PRV）的最大剂量（2.14±0.60）Gy与右眼晶状体PRV最大剂量（3.05±0.10）Gy在3野TD计划与HT计划差异有统计学意义（t=0.77、0.63,P<0.05）,眼晶状体PRV在最大剂量方面具有一定优势。治疗出束时间差异无统计学意义。TD计划中起始角度对左右眼晶状体PRV最大剂量、左肺平均剂量及治疗出束时间没有影响。结论 对于≥ 9野的TD调强计划相对于HT计划在靶区、危及器官及治疗出束时间方面能达到一致的结果,但在眼晶状体PRV最大剂量方面具有一定优势。     

螺旋断层放疗提升鼻咽癌放疗剂量的可行性研究

目的 探讨应用螺旋断层放疗(HT)进行鼻咽癌放疗处方剂量提升的可行性及剂量学特点。方法 选取10例9野静态调强放疗的鼻咽癌计划,制定HT计划和静态调强(sIMRT)计划。在危及器官(OAR)符合正常组织临床影响量化分析标准的前提下,提升两组计划处方剂量,并比较剂量提升空间及处方剂量提升后两者的剂量学差异。结果 与sIMRT计划相比,HT计划所达到的处方剂量比sIMRT计划增加了42.6%(t=6.373,P<0.01);处方剂量提升后,HT计划的均匀性指数仍优于sIMRT计划(t=-2.288,P<0.05),但适形度指数略低于sIMRT计划(P>0.05)。限制HT计划处方剂量提升的OAR为脊髓(2例)、视神经(5例)、脑干(3例);限制sIMRT计划处方剂量提升的OAR为眼晶状体(1例)、脊髓(1例)、腮腺(8例)。结论 HT的高束流调强能力,使其在有效保护OAR的前提下,能够提高鼻咽癌放疗处方剂量。在sIMRT实现高处方剂量要求存在困难时,可考虑使用HT进行放疗。     

胸上段食管癌无均整器容积弧形调强与固定野调强放疗计划的剂量学比较

目的 探讨在瓦里安TrueBeam^TM直线加速器中使用无均整器出束容积弧形调强(RA-FFF)及常规固定野调强(IMRT)两种计划剂量学差异.方法 选择10例分期为cT_2-3N_0-1M_0-1a胸上段食管癌患者定位CT资料,使用ECLIPSE^TM 10.0.4治疗计划系统分别设计RA-FFF、IMRT根治性放疗计划,处方剂量为60 Gy/30次,比较2种计划的剂量学参数和执行效率.结果 2种计划靶区适形度相似,差异无统计学意义;IMRT计划的均匀性指数高于RA-FFF计划(t=7.298,P=0.008);RA-FFF计划中肺组织的V₂₀、V₅低于IMRT计划(t=2.451、2.604,P<0.05).RA-FFF及IMRT两种计划制定时间分别为(5.3±1.4)、(3.5±1.7)h(t=2.585,P<0.05),机器总跳数分别为632±213及734±132(t=-1.287,P=0.084),治疗执行时间分别为(2.2±0.9)、(4.5±1.3)min(t=4.60,P<0.01).结论 与IMRT计划相比,RA-FFF在胸上段食管癌治疗中具有相似的靶区剂量分布,可更好地保护肺组织,计划制定时间较长但执行效率较高.     

宫颈癌术后螺旋断层放疗与常规加速器调强放疗的剂量学比较

目的 研究宫颈癌术后螺旋断层放疗(helical tomotherapy,HT)与常规静态调强放疗(IMRT)的剂量学特点。方法 采用10例宫颈癌术后患者CT图像,统一勾画靶区及危及器官(膀胱、直肠、小肠及双侧股骨头),分别传输至HT计划系统和IMRT计划系统,比较两组计划剂量体积直方图、适形度指数(CI)、均匀指数(HI)和危及器官所接受的照射剂量和体积,统一给予阴道残端60 Gy/25次,亚临床病灶50 Gy/25次,同时限定膀胱、直肠、小肠、股骨头等危及器官受照射剂量与体积。统一应用50 Gy处方剂量评价和比较CI和HI。结果 HT组适形指数(0.94±0.03)和均匀指数(1.28±0.02)均明显好于IMRT组(0.85±0.01和1.36±0.03)(t =5.12和-6.34, P<0.01);HT组PTV平均剂量为51.77Gy显著低于IMRT组54.53Gy(t =-8.01, P<0.05);HT组膀胱、直肠和小肠最大剂量、平均剂量、V₃₀、V₄₀和V₅₀照射体积均显著低于IMRT组;HT组左、右侧股骨头最大剂量、平均剂量、V₃₀和V₄₀照射体积均显著低于IMRT组。结论 HT与IMRT计划均有较好的靶区剂量分布,但HT组在适形指数、均匀指数及对周围危及器官的保护均比IMRT组有明显优势。     

鼻咽癌三种调强放疗计划剂量学对比研究

目的 对比鼻咽癌常规固定野调强（IMRT）、容积旋转调强（VMAT）以及断层调强（HT）3种不同调强放疗计划的剂量学差异。方法 选择18例接受VMAT治疗的鼻咽癌患者,以相同处方剂量和目标条件分别重新进行IMRT和HT计划设计。比较3种计划靶区的均匀度（HI）、适形度（CI）、最大剂量以及平均剂量。危及器官的最大量和平均量以及感兴趣区的剂量体积、计划执行时间和机器跳数（MU）。结果 3种计划在靶区的覆盖率满足临床要求。IMRT计划在靶区的HI和CI方面结果最差,HT计划结果最优。危及器官方面,IMRT计划受量最高,HT计划的脊髓、脑干和腮腺受量最低;但对于视神经、晶状体以及视交叉HT计划的受量最高而VMAT计划的受量最低。IMRT的治疗时间（8.0±0.5） min高于VMAT（3.9±0.1）min和HT（7.4±0.9）min。与VMAT相比,IMRT每次治疗为（711.4±78.7）MU,高于VMAT的（596.4±33.7）MU。结论 鼻咽癌IMRT、VMAT以及HT计划在靶区覆盖和危及器官保护上都可以达到临床要求,在靶区的适形度和均匀性上HT计划优于VMAT和IMRT,但在治疗时间和加速器的机器跳数上VMAT较有优势。     

Treatment and Dosimetric Advantages Between VMAT, IMRT, and Helical TomoTherapy in Prostate Cancer

We investigated the possible treatment and dosimetric advantage of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) over step-and-shoot intensity-modulated radiation therapy (step-and-hhoot IMRT) and helical tomotherapy (HT). Twelve prostate cancer patients undergoing VMAT to the prostate were included. Three treatment plans (VMAT, step-and-shoot IMRT, HT) were generated for each patient. The doses to clinical target volume and 95% of planning target volume were both ≥78 Gy. Target coverage, conformity index, dose to rectum/bladder, monitor units (MU), treatment time, equivalent uniform dose (EUD), normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of targets, and rectum/bladder were compared between techniques. HT provided superior conformity and significantly less rectal volume exposed to 65 Gy and 40 Gy, as well as EUD/NTCP of rectum than step-and-shoot IMRT, whereas VMAT had a slight dosimetric advantage over step-and-shoot IMRT. Notably, significantly lower MUs were needed for VMAT (309.7 ± 35.4) and step-and-shoot IMRT (336.1 ± 16.8) than for HT (3368 ± 638.7) (p < 0.001). The treatment time (minutes) was significantly shorter for VMAT (2.6 ± 0.5) than step-and-shoot IMRT (3.8 ± 0.3) and HT (3.8 ± 0.6) (p < 0.001). Dose verification of VMAT using point dose and film dosimetry met the accepted criteria. VMAT and step-and-shoot IMRT have comparable dosimetry, but treatment efficiency is significantly higher for VMAT than for step-and-shoot IMRT and HT.     

三维适形、逆向调强和旋转调强放疗技术治疗胸段食管癌的剂量学比较

目的 比较胸段食管癌3种放疗技术( 3D-CRT、IMRT、RapidArc)的剂量学特点,并分析3种技术的优劣及应用特点.方法 15例胸段食管癌患者入组,依据CT图像,勾画靶区,针对患者的同一套CT图像的相同靶区分别制定3D-CRT、5野IMRT(IMRT5)、7野IMRT( IMRT7)、9野IMRT(IMRT9)、单弧Arc( Arc1)、双弧Arc( Arc2)共6套计划.PTV处方剂量为40 Gy分20次4周+19.6 Gy分14次7d.结果 3D-CRT计划各项靶区剂量学参数明显差于IMRT计划及RapidArc计划(t=5.77、3.52,P＜0.05),6套计划的PTV V95(％)分别为:3D-CRT (91.55 ±2.90),IMRT5(96.66±1.05),IMRT7 (96.87±1.23),IMRT (96.81±1.16),Arcl (94.98±1.41),Arc2 (95.93±1.32).RapidArc计划的靶区适形度(CI)最好(t=3.76,10.01,P＜0.05),IMRT计划的靶区均匀性(HI)最好(t =3.93、3.37,P＜0.05).危及器官参数RapidArc与IMRT各计划之间差异无统计学意义.3D-CRT和RapidArc计划的机器跳数明显少于IMRT计划,差异高达75％.结论 对于胸段食管癌患者,采用IMRT或RapidArc技术可以在保护正常组织的同时,涵盖临床必需的治疗靶区.3D-CRT计划对降低正常组织低剂量散射区方面优势明显.RapidArc计划靶区剂量学参数与IMRT计划比较未见明显优势.     

Single-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (sVMAT) as adjuvant treatment for gastric cancer: Dosimetric comparisons with three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT)

To compare the dosimetric differences between the single-arc volumetric-modulated arc therapy (sVMAT), 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques in treatment planning for gastric cancer as adjuvant radiotherapy. Twelve patients were retrospectively analyzed. In each patient's case, the parameters were compared based on the dose-volume histogram (DVH) of the sVMAT, 3D-CRT, and IMRT plans, respectively. Three techniques showed similar target dose coverage. The maximum and mean doses of the target were significantly higher in the sVMAT plans than that in 3D-CRT plans and in the 3D-CRT/IMRT plans, respectively, but these differences were clinically acceptable. The IMRT and sVMAT plans successfully achieved better target dose conformity, reduced the V_20/30, and mean dose of the left kidney, as well as the V_20/30 of the liver, compared with the 3D-CRT plans. And the sVMAT technique reduced the V₂₀ of the liver much significantly. Although the maximum dose of the spinal cord were much higher in the IMRT and sVMAT plans, respectively (mean 36.4 vs 39.5 and 40.6 Gy), these data were still under the constraints. Not much difference was found in the analysis of the parameters of the right kidney, intestine, and heart. The IMRT and sVMAT plans achieved similar dose distribution to the target, but superior to the 3D-CRT plans, in adjuvant radiotherapy for gastric cancer. The sVMAT technique improved the dose sparings of the left kidney and liver, compared with the 3D-CRT technique, but showed few dosimetric advantages over the IMRT technique. Studies are warranted to evaluate the clinical benefits of the VMAT treatment for patients with gastric cancer after surgery in the future.     

动态钨门技术在中段食管癌螺旋断层调强放疗中的应用

目的 评价螺旋断层调强放疗（TOMO）设备升级后,能否用5.0 cm动态钨门替代2.5 cm固定钨门治疗中段食管癌。方法 对中国医学科学院北京协和医学院肿瘤医院收治的10例局部晚期根治性中段食管癌患者进行研究。在TOMO计划系统分别设计2.5 cm固定钨门（FJ2.5）、2.5 cm动态钨门（DJ2.5）和5.0 cm动态钨门（DJ5.0）计划。比较3种计划的靶区适形度指数（CI）、均匀性指数（HI）和危及器官（OAR）受量以评价计划质量;比较出束时间和机器跳数以评价效率。结果 3种计划的靶区CI和HI均满足临床要求。与DJ5.0计划相比,FJ2.5计划的双肺V₅和平均剂量、正常组织V₅、V₁₀和平均剂量均增加,差异有统计学意义（t=9.751、4.163、11.840、10.321、3.745,P<0.05）,DJ2.5计划的心脏V₃₀、V₄₀、平均剂量和最大剂量、正常组织V₂₀和平均剂量均降低,差异有统计学意义（-2.454、-3.275、-4.192、-6.435、-4.139、-6.431,P<0.05）。与DJ2.5计划相比,FJ2.5计划的双肺V₅、V₂₀、V₃₀和平均剂量、心脏V₃₀和平均剂量、脊髓和脊髓计划体积（PRV）最大剂量、正常组织V₅、V₁₀、V₂₀和平均剂量均增加,差异有统计学意义（t=8.289、6.142、3.137、8.895、3.597、4.565、3.782、5.429、16.421、12.496、8.286、11.933,P<0.05）。与FJ2.5和DJ2.5计划相比,DJ5.0计划的平均出束时间分别缩短43.9%和42.8%,平均机器跳数分别减少42.8%和43.8%。结论 若综合考虑计划质量和执行效率,建议采用5.0 cm动态钨门技术用于中段食管癌螺旋断层调强放疗,不但可以有效缩短治疗时间、提高射线利用率,而且与2.5 cm固定钨门技术相比双肺和正常组织保护更好。若只考虑计划质量,建议采用2.5 cm动态钨门技术,其计划质量好。     

A study of the dosimetric characteristics between different fixed-field IMRT and VMAT in early-stage primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma

This analysis was designed to compare dosimetric parameters among different fixed-field intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) solutions and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) to identify which can achieve the lowest risk of organs at risk (OARs) and treatment delivery efficiently. A total of 16 patients (8 male and 8 female) with early-stage primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) were enrolled with planned gross tumor volume (PGTV) 45?Gy and planning target volume (PTV) 40?Gy. Four different plans were generated: 5-, 7, 9-field IMRT, and VMAT. The dose distributions for PGTV and PTV OARs (lungs, left ventricle, heart, thyroid gland, and breasts) were compared. The monitor units (MUs) and treatment delivery time were also evaluated. Mean conformity index (CI) and homogeneity index (HI) for PGTV in 5F-, 7F-, 9F-IMRT, and VMAT were 1.01 and 1.10, 1.01 and 1.10, 1.01 and 1.10, and 1.01 and 1.11 (p?=?0.963 and 0.843), whereas these 2 indices for PTV were 1.04 and 1.22, 1.03 and 1.19, 1.03 and 1.17, and 1.08 and 1.14 (p?=?0.964 and 0.969), respectively. D_mean (Gy), V4 (%), D50 (Gy), and D80 (Gy) to the left and right breasts increased by 0.7?Gy and 0.1?Gy, 6.8% and 7.7%, 0.9?Gy and 1.7?Gy, and 1.0?Gy and 1.5?Gy in VMAT, respectively. The 9-beam IMRT plan had the highest MUs (25,762.4 MUs) and the longest treatment delivery time (10.7 minutes); whereas, the VMAT had the lowest MUs (13,345.0) and the shortest treatment delivery time (5.9 minutes). Seven- and 9-field IMRT and VMAT provide improved tumor coverage compared with 5F-IMRT, whereas VMAT shows higher treatment delivery efficiency than IMRT technique. Seven- and 9-field IMRT slightly reduce the low dose radiation exposure of breasts compared with VMAT technique. The 7- and 9-field IMRT and VMAT techniques both can be safely and efficiently delivered to patients with PMBCL.     

直肠癌静态调强与容积旋转调强放疗计划的剂量学对比研究

目的 对比研究直肠癌术后患者应用静态调强放疗(IMRT)和容积旋转调强放疗(VMAT)的计划质量、治疗效率和剂量精度,为临床治疗技术的选择提供参考依据.方法 选择10例直肠癌术后调强放疗患者,行CT模拟定位并勾画靶区及危及器官,在同一计划系统上给予相同处方剂量和目标优化条件,分别设计5野IMRT计划和双弧VMAT计划.比较两种计划的靶区(PTV/CTV)受量、适形指数(CI)、均匀指数(HI)、危及器官(OAR)的受量、机器跳数、治疗计划执行时间,以及剂量验证通过率.结果 两种治疗计划均能满足临床剂量要求,VMAT计划的靶区剂量覆盖率略低于IMRT计划.VMAT和IMRT计划的HI分别为0.095和0.101,差异无统计学意义(t=2.61, P>0.05);而IMRT计划的CI(0.737)优于VMAT计划(0.614)(t=4.94, P<0.05),考虑为VMAT计划优化过程中对周围正常组织低剂量区受量限制过于严格,从而造成计划的适形度受到影响.VMAT计划中正常组织如膀胱、股骨头的低剂量区较之IMRT计划均有不同程度增加.VMAT和IMRT计划的平均机器跳数(MUs)分别为599和515(t=4.72, P<0.05),相应的治疗时间分别为201和304 s(t=5.83, P<0.05).使用Delta⁴对两种计划进行验证,γ通过率(选用3%/3 mm标准)分别为VMAT 93.13%和IMRT 96.00%(t=3.75, P<0.05).结论 直肠癌VMAT和IMRT 计划均可满足临床要求,VMAT计划可以显著降低治疗时间,提高治疗效率,但其疗效还需进一步临床评估.     

Dosimetric comparison of 3D conformal,IMRT, and V-MAT techniques for accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI)

The purpose is to dosimetrically compare the following 3 delivery techniques: 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT), intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT), and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (V-MAT) in the treatment of accelerated partial-breast irradiation (APBI). Overall, 16 patients with T1/2N0 breast cancer were treated with 3D-CRT (multiple, noncoplanar photon fields) on the RTOG 0413 partial-breast trial. These cases were subsequently replanned using static gantry IMRT and V-MAT technology to understand dosimetric differences among these 3 techniques. Several dosimetric parameters were used in plan quality evaluation, including dose conformity index (CI) and dose-volume histogram analysis of normal tissue coverage. Quality assurance studies including gamma analysis were performed to compare the measured and calculated dose distributions. The IMRT and V-MAT plans gave more conformal target dose distributions than the 3D-CRT plans (p < 0.05 in CI). The volume of ipsilateral breast receiving 5 and 10 Gy was significantly less using the V-MAT technique than with either 3D-CRT or IMRT (p < 0.05). The maximum lung dose and the ipsilateral lung volume receiving 10 (V₁₀) or 20 Gy (V₂₀) were significantly less with both V-MAT and IMRT (p < 0.05). The IMRT technique was superior to 3D-CRT and V-MAT of low dose distributions in ipsilateral lung (p < 0.05 in V₅ and D₅). The total mean monitor units (MUs) for V-MAT (621.0 ± 111.9) were 12.2% less than those for 3D-CRT (707.3 ± 130.9) and 46.5% less than those for IMRT (1161.4 ± 315.6) (p < 0.05). The average machine delivery time was 1.5 ± 0.2 minutes for the V-MAT plans, 7.0 ± 1.6 minutes for the 3D-CRT plans, and 11.5 ± 1.9 minutes for the IMRT plans, demonstrating much less delivery time for V-MAT. Based on this preliminary study, V-MAT and IMRT techniques offer improved dose conformity as compared with 3D-CRT techniques without increasing dose to the ipsilateral lung. In terms of MU and delivery time, V-MAT is significantly more efficient for APBI than for conventional 3D-CRT and static-beam IMRT.     

胸段食管癌患者三种放疗计划心脏和肺的剂量学比较

目的 比较胸中下段食管癌3种放疗技术心脏和肺的剂量分布。方法 搜集2015年1月至2016年2月在浙江省肿瘤医院接受治疗的15例胸中下段食管鳞癌患者资料。患者均接受胸部放射治疗,每位患者共制作3套放疗计划。调强放疗（IMRT）和容积旋转调强放疗（VMAT）在RayStation 4.0v系统制作,螺旋断层放疗（TOMO）在TomoH^TM Version 2.0.5系统制作。处方剂量60 Gy/30次。比较计划体积（PTV）、心脏、心脏亚单位以及肺剂量参数。结果 PTV、心脏和肺的平均体积为（399±355）、（671±274）和（3 907±1 717） cm³。与IMRT和VMAT相比,TOMO可以降低PTV、心脏、左心房及肺的最大剂量（H=10.889、7.433、12.080、11.401,P<0.05）。3种放疗技术的适形指数和均匀性指数差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。结论 相较于IMRT和VMAT,TOMO可以降低PTV、心脏、左心房和肺的最大剂量,但均匀性及适形性差异无统计学意义。放疗过程中心脏与肺存在相互影响,TOMO技术可能带来的临床优势尚待进一步研究证实。     

Study for reducing lung dose of upper thoracic esophageal cancer radiotherapy by auto-planning: volumetric-modulated arc therapy vs intensity-modulated radiation therapy

This study aimed to investigate the dosimetric differences and lung sparing between volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in the treatment of upper thoracic esophageal cancer with T3N0M0 for preoperative radiotherapy by auto-planning (AP). Sixteen patient cases diagnosed with upper thoracic esophageal cancer T3N0M0 for preoperative radiotherapy were retrospectively studied, and 3 plans were generated for each patient: full arc VMAT AP plan with double arcs, partial arc VMAT AP plan with 6 partial arcs, and conventional IMRT AP plan. A simultaneous integrated boost with 2 levels was planned in all patients. Target coverage, organ at risk sparing, treatment parameters including monitor units and treatment time (TT) were evaluated. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to check for significant differences (p?<?0.05) between datasets. VMAT plans (pVMAT and fVMAT) significantly reduced total lung volume treated above 20?Gy (V₂₀), 25?Gy (V₂₅), 30?Gy (V₃₀), 35?Gy (V₃₅), 40?Gy (V₄₀), and without increasing the value of V₁₀, V₁₃, and V₁₅. For V₅ of total lung value, pVMAT was similar to aIMRT, and it was better than fVMAT. Both pVMAT and fVMAT improved the target dose coverage and significantly decreased maximum dose for the spinal cord, monitor unit, and TT. No significant difference was observed with respect to V₁₀ and V₁₅ of body. VMAT AP plan was a good option for treating upper thoracic esophageal cancer with T3N0M0, especially partial arc VMAT AP plan. It had the potential to effectively reduce lung dose in a shorter TT and with superior target coverage and dose homogeneity.     

直肠癌术后三种不同放疗计划的剂量学比较

目的 探讨直肠癌术后螺旋断层放疗(HT)、静态调强放疗(IMRT)及三维适形放疗(3D-CRT)的剂量学特点,为临床选择直肠癌术后放疗方法提供依据.方法 回顾性选取10例Ⅱ、Ⅲ期中低位直肠癌切除术(Dixon手术)后患者,在其CT定位图像上勾画靶区及危及器官,并进行HT、IMRT及3D-CRT计划设计.要求至少95％的PTV达到处方剂量为50 Gy.结果 3种治疗计划均能满足处方剂量要求;除3D-CRT计划外,HT计划与IMRT计划均能较好地满足各危及器官剂量限制要求.HT、IMRT、3D-CRT计划的适形度指数CI分别为0.86、0.82和0.62(F=206.81,P＜0.001),剂量均匀性指数(HI)分别为0.001、0.157和0.205(x2 =15.8,P＜0.001).3D-CRT计划骨盆V50、膀胱V40、小肠V50、股骨头D5明显高于IMRT与HT计划(P＜0.05),而后两者差别无统计学意义.HT计划小肠V15大于IMRT计划与3D-CRT计划(71.1％ vs.63.3％、67.7％),差异无统计学意义.结论 HT、IM RT及3D-CRT3种治疗计划均可满足直肠癌靶区处方剂量要求.HT计划适形度和均匀性最好,其次为IMRT计划,3D-CRT计划最差.HT计划满足所有危及器官的剂量限制,对正常组织的保护略优于IMRT计划.3D-CRT计划简便、实用性强,但对危及器官的保护较差.     

Hi-ART螺旋断层放疗机MV螺旋CT剂量指数的测量

目的 探讨Hi-ART螺旋断层放疗机MV扇形束CT图像获取过程中患者接受的剂量。方法 用PTWTM30009CT电离室分别在T40017头部和T40016躯干模体中,选择扫描层厚2、4及6mm和改变扫描范围等参数,分别测量加权CT剂量指数,计算相应的剂量长度乘积,并与XVIkV锥形束CT、ACQSim模拟定位CT的结果进行比较。结果 Hi-ART螺旋断层治疗机的CT剂量指数与层厚成反比,剂量长度乘积与扫描范围成正比。临床应用条件下Hi-ART的CT剂量指数在头颈部比XVIkV锥形束CT大,但躯干较小。结论 CT剂量指数能反映患者成像过程中接受的剂量,可以作为治疗保证与控制的指标。图像引导过程中应该合理选择层厚,减少扫描范围,最大限度减少患者接受剂量。