Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Med Phys ; 33(1): 3-8, 2008 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20041045

ABSTRACT

The purpose is to compare CT-based dosimetry with International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU 38) bladder and rectum reference points in patients of carcinoma of uterine cervix treated with intracavitary brachytherapy (ICA). Twenty-two consecutive patients were evaluated. Orthogonal radiographs and CT images were acquired and transferred to PLATO planning system. Bladder and rectal reference points were identified according to ICRU 38 recommendations. Dosimetry was carried out based on Manchester system. Patient treatment was done using (192)Iridium high dose rate (HDR) remote after-loading machine based on the conventional radiograph-based dosimetry. ICRU rectal and bladder point doses from the radiograph plans were compared with D(2), dose received by 2 cm(3) of the organ receiving maximum dose from CT plan. V(2), volume of organ receiving dose more than the ICRU reference point, was evaluated. The mean (+/-standard deviation) volume of rectum and bladder was 60 (+/-28) cm(3) and 138 (+/-41) cm(3) respectively. The mean reference volume in radiograph and CT plan was 105 (+/-7) cm(3) and 107 (+/-7) cm(3) respectively. It was found that 6 (+/-4) cm(3) of rectum and 16 (+/-10) cm(3) of bladder received dose more than the prescription dose. V(2) of rectum and bladder was 7 (+/-1.7) cm(3) and 20.8 (+/-6) cm(3) respectively. Mean D(2) of rectum and bladder was found to be 1.11 (+/-0.2) and 1.56 (+/-0.6) times the mean ICRU reference points respectively. This dosimteric study suggests that comparison of orthogonal X-ray-based and CT-based HDR ICA planning is feasible. ICRU rectal point dose correlates well with maximum rectal dose, while ICRU bladder point underestimates the maximum bladder dose.

2.
J Med Phys ; 31(2): 89-94, 2006 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21206671

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this study is to compare geometric optimization (GO) with anatomy based inverse optimization (ABIO). Five patients of carcinoma prostate treated with HDR interstitial brachytherapy had been studied. Post implant CT scans of 5 mm slice thickness were obtained; target volume and other critical structures rectum, bladder and urethra were drawn by the clinician. Plans were obtained with geometric optimization and anatomy based inversed optimization. Anatomy based inverse planning implemented currently in PLATO BPS version 14.2, is based on geometric and dose point optimization and designed to account for the critical structures. Graphical optimization (GrO) is used to fine-tune the distribution ie to reduce the dose to critical structures and to improve the target coverage in both geometric optimization and anatomy based inverse optimization plans. DVH of target, rectum, bladder and urethra were evaluated and compared, dose homogeneity index and conformity index were also evaluated for all the plans. The mean target coverage was 93.9±7%, 90.3±4%, 82±13%, 91.6±3 for different optimization techniques GO, GO_gr, ABIO and ABIO_gr respectively. The target coverage in ABIO is not clinically acceptable. Maximum dose, dose to 2% of the volume of urethra D(2%,U) was 137±12%, 123.2±2%, 111.5±9, 122.7±4 for GO, GO_gr, ABIO and ABIO_gr respectively. The mean conformity index values were 0.71, 0.76, 0.65, 0.82 for GO, GO_gr, ABIO, ABIO_gr respectively. ABIO_gr has a good conformity over all other optimization techniques. However the difference is not very significant between GO and GO_gr. The mean values of DHI are 0.81, 0.77, 0.65 and 0.75 for GO, GO_gr, ABIO and ABIO_gr respectively. Geometric optimization is highly homogenous compared to all other optimization techniques.To conclude, target coverage in ABIO is not clinically acceptable. However ABIO followed by graphical optimization is much superior in sparing of critical structures and conformity compared to geometrical optimization. Target coverage is marginally better in GO compared to ABIO_gr. Homogeneity is superior in GO compared to ABIO_gr. However ABIO_gr plans were clinically acceptable with respect to homogeneity. Further, dose escalation to the target is possible with ABIO, without exceeding the tolerance dose to urethra. Clinical correlation of genitourinary toxicity has to be studied.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...