检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
机构地区:[1]湖北省肿瘤医院放疗介入科,湖北武汉430079
出 处:《现代肿瘤医学》2013年第7期1601-1603,共3页Journal of Modern Oncology
摘 要:目的:比较调强放疗技术(IMRT)和三维适形放疗技术(3DCRT)治疗胸上段食管癌的剂量学差异。方法:选择34例胸上段食管癌患者,对每例患者分别进行调强适形放疗和三维适形放疗,利用剂量体积直方图来比较两种计划中靶区及器官的剂量学差异。结果:IMRT在靶区适合度和靶区剂量均匀性方面均优于3DCRT,IMRT减少了脊髓最大所受剂量,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05);双肺受照剂量V5 IMRT高于3DCRT(P<0.05),但是V20差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:对胸上段食管癌IMRT有更好的剂量适形性,优于3DCRT放疗。Objective:To compare the difference between intensity modulated radiation therapy(IMRT)and 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy(3DCRT)for patients with upper esophageal carcinoma.Methods:All 34 patients with upper esophageal carcinoma were treated by IMRT and 3DCRT individually,the difference of exposure dose between target area and critical organ was compared by dose volume histogram(DVH).Results:In terms of target dose uniformity and conformity,IMRT was much better than 3DCRT,IMRT reduced maximum dose of spinal cord,and the results were statistically significant(P0.05);in the dose of lung and heart,V5 IMRT's higher than 3DCRT(P0.05),and there was no difference in the dose of lung and heart(P0.05).Conclusion:To the patients with upper esophageal carcinoma,IMRT was better than 3DCRT for its good dose uniformity and conformity.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:18.189.189.4