近距离放射治疗
剂量学
医学
剂量率
宫颈癌
核医学
放射科
癌
放射治疗
宫颈癌
医学物理学
内科学
癌症
作者
Daya Nand Sharma,Pritee Chaudhari,Seema Sharma,Leena Gupta,Pandjatcharam Jagadesan,Goura Kisor Rath,Pramod Kumar Julka
标识
DOI:10.1120/jacmp.v15i2.4670
摘要
This study compares the dosimetry of high‐dose‐rate intracavitary brachytherapy (HDR‐ICBT) performed with and without general anesthesia/spinal anesthesia (GA/SA) in patients with cervical carcinoma. We retrospectively retrieved the records of 138 HDR‐ICBT applicator insertions performed in 46 patients: 69 performed with GA/SA (anesthesia group known as AG) in 23 patients, and 69 performed without GA/SA (nonanesthesia group known as NAG) in 23 patients. The intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) application was done with central tandem and two vaginal ovoids. For each ICBT plan, a high‐dose‐rate (HDR) dose of 7 Gy was prescribed to point A. From each plan, the doses to Point B right , Point B left , bladder and rectal reference points ( and ) were recorded and compared in the two groups. Student's t‐test was applied to find out the significance of difference. The two groups were comparable in terms of demography and clinical characteristics. Mean Point doses in AG and NAG were 1.89 Gy (27% of Point A dose) and 1.82 Gy (26% of Point A dose), respectively. Mean Point doses in AG and NAG were 1.91 Gy (27% of Point A dose) and 1.85 Gy (26% of point A), respectively (p‐value 0.7). The mean dose to in AG and NAG was 5.03 Gy and 4.90 Gy, respectively (p‐value 0.6). The mean dose to was significantly higher in AG than NAG (5.09 Gy vs. 4.49 Gy, p‐value 0.01). Although based on conventional 2D dosimetry planning, our study has demonstrated that avoiding GA/SA does not result in inferior HDR‐ICBT dosimetry. PACS number: 87.53.Jw, 87.50.cm
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI