Image guided high-dose-rate brachytherapy versus volumetric modulated arc therapy for head and neck cancer: A comparative analysis of dosimetry for target volume and organs at risk

Background The aim of the study was to present dosimetric comparison of image guided high-dose-rate brachytherapy (IGBT) with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for head and neck cancer regarding conformity of dose distribution to planning target volume (PTV) and doses to organs at risk (OARs)....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Radiology and oncology 2018-11, Vol.52 (4), p.461-467
Hauptverfasser: Akiyama, Hironori, Pesznyák, Csilla, Béla, Dalma, Ferenczi, Örs, Major, Tibor, Polgár, Csaba, Takácsi-Nagy, Zoltán
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background The aim of the study was to present dosimetric comparison of image guided high-dose-rate brachytherapy (IGBT) with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for head and neck cancer regarding conformity of dose distribution to planning target volume (PTV) and doses to organs at risk (OARs). Patients and methods Thirty-eight consecutive patients with T1-4 mobile tongue, floor of mouth and base of tongue cancer treated with IGBT were selected. For these patients additional VMAT treatment plans were also prepared using identical computed tomography data. OARs and PTV related parameters (e.g. V98, D0.1cm3, Dmean, etc.) were compared. Results Mean V98 of the PTV was 90.2% vs. 90.4% (p > 0.05) for IGBT and VMAT, respectively. Mean D0.1cm3 to the mandible was 77.0% vs. 85.4% (p < 0.05). Dmean to ipsilateral and contralateral parotid glands was 4.6% vs. 4.6% and 3.0% vs. 3.9% (p > 0.05). Dmean to ipsilateral and contralateral submandibular glands was 16.4% vs. 21.9% (p > 0.05) and 8.2% vs. 16.9% (p < 0.05), respectively. Conclusions Both techniques showed excellent target coverage. With IGBT dose to normal tissues was lower than with VMAT. The results prove the superiority of IGBT in the protection of OARs and the important role of this invasive method in the era of new external beam techniques.
ISSN:1581-3207
1318-2099
1581-3207
0485-893X
DOI:10.2478/raon-2018-0042