PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this research was to compare two treatment techniques for oropharyngeal cancers: conventional linac-based static intensity-modulated radiotherapy (sIMRT) and helical tomotherapy (HT). The study examined several parameters, including target coverage, organs at risk, integral dose, and beam on time. Additionally, the study evaluated the doses to the parotid, temporomandibular joint, and pharyngeal constrictor muscles, which are important for swallowing.
METHODS: The present study retrospectively analyzed the data of 13 patients with oropharyngeal cancer who underwent radiotherapy between 2019 and 2021. The treatment plans for each patient were regenerated using both sIMRT and HT treatment planning systems with the sequential boost method. The techniques were evaluated and compared based on dose-volume histogram, homogeneity index, and conformity index parameters. The target coverage and organs at risk were statistically compared for two techniques. Additionally, the doses received by the healthy tissue volume were obtained for integral dose evaluation. The beam on time for each technique was assessed.
RESULTS: When considering planning target volume evaluation, there was no difference in Dmeans between the two techniques and sIMRT demonstrated higher D2% values compared to the HT. The HT technique had better results for all organs at risk, such as the parotid, temporomandibular joint, and pharyngeal constrictor muscle. As for integral dose, it has been shown that the sIMRT technique provides better protection compared to HT. In addition, the beam on time was also longer with the HT technique.
CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques may provide optimal target coverage for patients with oropharyngeal cancer. HT conferred notable advantages, especially with regard to critical structures implicated in swallowing, such as the parotid, temporomandibular joint, and pharyngeal constrictor muscle, in comparison to sIMRT.
METHODS: The present study retrospectively analyzed the data of 13 patients with oropharyngeal cancer who underwent radiotherapy between 2019 and 2021. The treatment plans for each patient were regenerated using both sIMRT and HT treatment planning systems with the sequential boost method. The techniques were evaluated and compared based on dose-volume histogram, homogeneity index, and conformity index parameters. The target coverage and organs at risk were statistically compared for two techniques. Additionally, the doses received by the healthy tissue volume were obtained for integral dose evaluation. The beam on time for each technique was assessed.
RESULTS: When considering planning target volume evaluation, there was no difference in Dmeans between the two techniques and sIMRT demonstrated higher D2% values compared to the HT. The HT technique had better results for all organs at risk, such as the parotid, temporomandibular joint, and pharyngeal constrictor muscle. As for integral dose, it has been shown that the sIMRT technique provides better protection compared to HT. In addition, the beam on time was also longer with the HT technique.
CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques may provide optimal target coverage for patients with oropharyngeal cancer. HT conferred notable advantages, especially with regard to critical structures implicated in swallowing, such as the parotid, temporomandibular joint, and pharyngeal constrictor muscle, in comparison to sIMRT.
摘要：
目的：这项研究的目的是比较两种口咽癌的治疗技术：基于常规直线加速器的静态调强放射治疗（sIMRT）和螺旋断层放射治疗（HT）。这项研究检查了几个参数，包括目标覆盖范围，处于危险中的器官，积分剂量,并按时发射光束。此外,这项研究评估了腮腺的剂量，颞下颌关节，和咽部收缩肌，这对吞咽很重要。
方法：本研究回顾性分析2019-2021年13例口咽恶性肿瘤患者的临床资料。使用sIMRT和HT治疗计划系统以及顺序增强方法重新生成每位患者的治疗计划。根据剂量-体积直方图对这些技术进行了评估和比较，同质性指数，和合格指数参数。对两种技术的目标覆盖率和风险器官进行了统计比较。此外,获得健康组织体积接受的剂量用于积分剂量评估.评估每种技术的光束接通时间。
结果：在考虑规划目标体积评估时，两种技术之间的Dmeans没有差异，与HT相比，sIMRT显示出更高的D2%值。HT技术对所有有风险的器官都有更好的结果，比如腮腺,颞下颌关节，和咽部收缩肌.至于积分剂量，已经表明，与HT相比，sIMRT技术提供了更好的保护。此外,HT技术的光束接通时间也更长。
结论：这两种技术都可以为口咽癌患者提供最佳的目标覆盖。HT赋予了显着的优势，特别是与吞咽有关的关键结构，比如腮腺,颞下颌关节，和咽部收缩肌，与sIMRT相比。
方法：本研究回顾性分析2019-2021年13例口咽恶性肿瘤患者的临床资料。使用sIMRT和HT治疗计划系统以及顺序增强方法重新生成每位患者的治疗计划。根据剂量-体积直方图对这些技术进行了评估和比较，同质性指数，和合格指数参数。对两种技术的目标覆盖率和风险器官进行了统计比较。此外,获得健康组织体积接受的剂量用于积分剂量评估.评估每种技术的光束接通时间。
结果：在考虑规划目标体积评估时，两种技术之间的Dmeans没有差异，与HT相比，sIMRT显示出更高的D2%值。HT技术对所有有风险的器官都有更好的结果，比如腮腺,颞下颌关节，和咽部收缩肌.至于积分剂量，已经表明，与HT相比，sIMRT技术提供了更好的保护。此外,HT技术的光束接通时间也更长。
结论：这两种技术都可以为口咽癌患者提供最佳的目标覆盖。HT赋予了显着的优势，特别是与吞咽有关的关键结构，比如腮腺,颞下颌关节，和咽部收缩肌，与sIMRT相比。
