摘要
目的探究SRS MapCHECK(SRS)、ArcCHECK(Arc)及Portal Dosimetry(PD)3种剂量验证系统在立体定向治疗计划验证中的应用情况。方法随机选取在我院行立体定向放疗的肿瘤患者45例,依据治疗计划分别设计SRS、Arc及PD的验证计划,并在Varian VitalBeam直线加速器上执行。在10%剂量阈值下,记录3%/2 mm、3%/1 mm、2%/2 mm、2%/1 mm和1%/1 mm的γ评价标准下3种剂量验证系统治疗计划的通过率情况。结果3种剂量验证系统在不同的评价标准下得到的治疗计划的γ通过率存在差异,但在3%/2 mm和2%/2 mm评价标准下,SRS和PD验证得到的γ通过率无显著差异(P值均>0.05);在3%/1 mm、2%/1 mm和1%/1 mm评价标准下,Arc和PD验证得到的γ通过率无显著差异(P值均>0.05);在确定治疗计划是否可行上,SRS优于Arc和PD,PD略优于Arc。结论3种剂量验证系统都可用于立体定向治疗计划的剂量验证,其中SRS因具有较高的空间分辨率,在立体定向治疗计划验证上优势明显,临床应用时可优先考虑,此外,SRS剂量验证较严格的γ评价标准可采用2%/1 mm,Arc和PD剂量验证较严格的γ评价标准可采用2%/2 mm或3%/1 mm。
Objective To investigate the application of SRS MapCHECK(SRS),ArcCHECK(Arc)and Portal Dosimetry(PD)dose verification systems in the verification of stereotactic treatment plans.Methods A total of 45 tumor patients who received stereotactic radiotherapy in our hospital were analyzed retrospectively,and the verification plans of SRS,Arc and PD were designed according to the treatment plan and executed on the Varian VitalBeam linear accelerator.At the 10%dose threshold,the pass rates of the three dose verification systems under theγevaluation criteria of 3%/2 mm,3%/1 mm,2%/2 mm,2%/1 mm and 1%/1 mm were recorded.Results There were significant differences in theγpass rates of treatment plans obtained by the three dose verification systems under different evaluation criteria,but there were no significant differences in theγpass rates obtained by SRS and PD validation at 3%/2 mm and 2%/2 mm evaluation criteria(all P>0.05);and there were no significant differences in theγpass rates obtained by Arc and PD validation at 3%/1 mm,2%/1 mm and 1%/1 mm(all P>0.05).In determining whether the treatment plan was feasible,SRS was superior to Arc and PD,and PD was slightly superior to Arc.Conclusion All the three dose verification systems can be used for dose verification of stereotactic treatment plans,among which SRS has obvious advantages in stereotactic treatment plan verification due to its high spatial resolution and can be given priority in clinical application.In addition,the more stringentγevaluation criteria for SRS dose verification can be 2%/1 mm,and the more stringentγevaluation criteria for Arc and PD dose verification can be 2%/2 mm or 3%/1 mm.
作者
刘凌湘
黄贤海
张庆钊
陈照辉
易兰
LIU Lingxiang;HUANG Xianhai;ZHANG Qingzhao;CHEN Zhaohui;YI Lan(Department of Oncology,Panyu Central Hospital,Guangzhou Guangdong 511400,China)
出处
《中国医疗设备》
2022年第11期67-70,共4页
China Medical Devices
