摘要
目的研究A点相同剂量单通道及三通道施源器治疗时B点、膀胱、直肠剂量理论上的不同,旨在找到最适宜临床治疗宫颈癌的后装方法。方法设定A点剂量为750cGy,应用宫颈癌后装治疗计划对单通道和三通道治疗宫颈癌B点、膀胱、直肠的剂量进行计算。结果单通道和三通道施源器治疗计划中B点为A点的剂量分别为26.25%(196.850±3.328),27.15%(203.612±5.074)(P=0.01);R1分别为A点的32.30%(242.245±18.874),29.96%(224.670±13.763)(P=0.023);R2分别为A点的27.11%(203.328±11.695),25.87%(194.055±9.704)(P=0.023);R3分别为A点的22.09%(165.663±7.989),21.36%(160.233±7.123)(P=0.034);R4分别为A点的18.61%(139.610±5.245),17.23%(129.188±5.196)(P=0.001);BL分别为A点的36.45%(247.898±22.715),28.37%(212.773±24.352)(P=0.001)。结论宫颈癌三通道治疗较单通道治疗对B点贡献大,直肠、膀胱剂量较小。因此三通道治疗宫颈癌较单通道更适宜。
Objective To investigate the same dose of point A, the different of point B, bladder and rectal dose in one-tube-applicator and three-tube-applicator. In order to indicate clicinal therapy. Methods Point A dose assuned 750 cGy, eanculated point B, bladder and rectal dose by two afterloading therapeutic plans. Results One-tube-applicator plan, point B dose was 26. 25% of point A＇s （ 196. 850 ± 3. 328 ）, three-tube-applicator plan, point B dose was 27. 15% of point A＇s（203.612 ±5.074） （P =0. 01 ）, respectively; Ri＇s was 32.30% （242. 245 ± 18. 874）, 29.96% （224. 670 ± 13.763 ） （P = 0. 023 ）, respectively; R2＇s was 27. 11% （203. 328± 11. 695 ） ,25.87%, （ 194. 055± 9. 704 ） （ P = 0. 023 ）, respectively; R3＇s was 22. 09% （ 165.663± 7. 989 ）, 21.36% （ 160. 233 ± 7. 123 ） （ P = 0. 034 ）, respectively ; a4＇ s was 18.61%, （ 139. 610 ±5. 245 ）, 17. 23% （ 129. 188 ± 5. 196 ） （ P = 0. 001 ） ,respectively ; BL＇s was 36.45% （247.898 ± 22. 715 ） ,28. 37% （212. 773± 24. 352） （ P = 0. 001 ） , respectively. Conclusion The use of three-tube-applicator afterloading therapy for cervix carcinoma is suprior to onetube-applicator, s in B dose and reduces bladder and rectal dose. So three-tube-applicator afterloading therapy for cervix carcinoma is better than one-tube-applicator＇s.
出处
《安徽医科大学学报》
CAS
北大核心
2007年第4期436-439,共4页
Acta Universitatis Medicinalis Anhui
基金
安徽省自然科学基金资助项目(编号:2003KJ218)
