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
作 者:黄陆茂 蔡文杰[1] 王勇[1] Huang Lumao;Cai Wenjie;Wang Yong(Departments of Radiation Oncology,First Hospital of Quanzhou Affiliated to Fujian Medical University,Quanzhou 362000,Fujian,China)
机构地区:[1]福建医科大学附属泉州第一医院放疗科,福建泉州362000
出 处:《广州医科大学学报》2024年第6期21-25,共5页Academic Journal of Guangzhou Medical University
摘 要:目的:本研究通过剂量学比较,探讨适形放射治疗(CRT)与调强放射治疗(IMRT)在治疗甲亢突眼(GO)中的优势及差异。方法:选取2024年1-4月在福建医科大学附属泉州第一医院接受放射治疗的8例GO患者,每位患者分别设计CRT和IMRT计划,并采用配对分析两种技术在靶区剂量均匀性(HI)、剂量适形度(CI)及正常组织晶体、眼球、视神经等剂量学上的差异,对比两种技术在机器总跳数MU上的差异。结果:IMRT在靶区剂量均匀性和适形度方面显著优于CRT(P<0.001),并在眼球、晶体PRV及视神经剂量控制上具有明显优势。然而,CRT在机器跳数上表现优于IMRT,治疗效率更高(P<0.001)。两种技术在晶体剂量控制方面差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:CRT和IMRT均满足GO治疗的临床需求,IMRT在靶区及周围危及器官剂量分布方面表现更为优越,CRT在治疗效率及部分器官保护上具优势,未来需扩大样本量以进一步验证两种技术的潜在优势。Objective:This study aimed to conduct a dosimetric comparison to elucidate the respective advantages and distinctions of Conformal Radiotherapy(CRT)and Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy(IMRT)in the treatment of Graves'Ophthalmopathy(GO).Methods:Eight patients diagnosed with GO who underwent radiotherapy at the First Hospital of Quanzhou Affiliated to Fujian Medical University between January and April 2024 were enrolled.For each patient,CRT and IMRT plans were independently designed.A paired analysis was conducted to compare the two techniques concerning target volume Homogeneity index(HI),Conformity index(CI),and dosimetric parameters for critical structures,including the lens,eyeballs,and optic nerves.Additionally,differences in machine unit(MUs)efficiency between the two modalities were analyzed.Results:IMRT demonstrated superior in homogeneity and conformity Index compared to CRT(P<0.001)and exhibited significant advantages in sparing the eyeballs,lens planning risk volume(PRV),and optic nerves.Conversely,the MUs was superior in CRT plans compared with IMRT(P<0.001),but there was no significant statistical difference In lens protection between them(P>0.05).Conclusion:Both CRT and IMRT effectively fulfill the clinical requirements for the treatment of GO.IMRT exhibits superior precision in dose distribution to the target volume and organs at risk(OARs),while CRT demonstrates advantages in treatment efficiency and the protection of certain organs.Further research with larger sample sizes is essential to comprehensively validate the potential merits of these two techniques.
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:216.73.216.170