Serhat Aras1, Türkan İkizceli2, Meryem Aktan3. 1. Department of Medical Imaging Techniques, University of Health Sciences, İstanbul, Turkey. 2. Department of Radiology, University of Health Sciences, İstanbul, Turkey. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Necmettin Erbakan University School of Medicine, Konya, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques on the target tissue and critical organ doses in terms of dosimetry, during treatment planning of patient's post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) to the left chest wall. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty breast cancer patients with left-sided post-mastectomy have selected for PMRT both 3D-CRT and IMRT techniques. Dosimetric calculation of dose simulation in Eclipse treatment planning system have been performed. Organs at risk with the maximum dose, minimum dose, mean dose, D95, conformity and homogeneity indexes and total monitor unit for the Planning Target Volume were compared in terms of the critical organ doses. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two treatment planning techniques in terms of maximum, minimum, mean dose and heterogeneity index (p>0.05). At low doses, the dose received at the heart was significantly lower with the 3D-CRT technique, but there was no statistically significant difference between the two techniques at the maximum and average doses in the high dose regions. CONCLUSION: For PMRT to the left chest wall, IMRT significantly improves the conformity of plan and reduce the high-dose volumes of ipsilateral lung and heart compared to 3D-CRT, but 3D-CRT is superior in terms of low-dose volume.
OBJECTIVE: To compare 3-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques on the target tissue and critical organ doses in terms of dosimetry, during treatment planning of patient's post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) to the left chest wall. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty breast cancer patients with left-sided post-mastectomy have selected for PMRT both 3D-CRT and IMRT techniques. Dosimetric calculation of dose simulation in Eclipse treatment planning system have been performed. Organs at risk with the maximum dose, minimum dose, mean dose, D95, conformity and homogeneity indexes and total monitor unit for the Planning Target Volume were compared in terms of the critical organ doses. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between the two treatment planning techniques in terms of maximum, minimum, mean dose and heterogeneity index (p>0.05). At low doses, the dose received at the heart was significantly lower with the 3D-CRT technique, but there was no statistically significant difference between the two techniques at the maximum and average doses in the high dose regions. CONCLUSION: For PMRT to the left chest wall, IMRT significantly improves the conformity of plan and reduce the high-dose volumes of ipsilateral lung and heart compared to 3D-CRT, but 3D-CRT is superior in terms of low-dose volume.
Authors: Lawrence B Marks; Soren M Bentzen; Joseph O Deasy; Feng-Ming Spring Kong; Jeffrey D Bradley; Ivan S Vogelius; Issam El Naqa; Jessica L Hubbs; Joos V Lebesque; Robert D Timmerman; Mary K Martel; Andrew Jackson Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Leah K Schubert; Vinai Gondi; Evan Sengbusch; David C Westerly; Emilie T Soisson; Bhudatt R Paliwal; Thomas Rockwell Mackie; Minesh P Mehta; Rakesh R Patel; Wolfgang A Tomé; George M Cannon Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2011-02-11 Impact factor: 6.280
Authors: Xing-Qi Lu; Stephanie Sullivan; Thomas Eggleston; Edward Holupka; Marc Bellerive; Antony Abner; Carolyn C Lamb; Anita Lee; Mary Ann Stevenson; Abram Recht Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2003-04-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Marilyn Stovall; Susan A Smith; Bryan M Langholz; John D Boice; Roy E Shore; Michael Andersson; Thomas A Buchholz; Marinela Capanu; Leslie Bernstein; Charles F Lynch; Kathleen E Malone; Hoda Anton-Culver; Robert W Haile; Barry S Rosenstein; Anne S Reiner; Duncan C Thomas; Jonine L Bernstein Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-06-14 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Sarah C Darby; David J Cutter; Marjan Boerma; Louis S Constine; Luis F Fajardo; Kazunori Kodama; Kiyohiko Mabuchi; Lawrence B Marks; Fred A Mettler; Lori J Pierce; Klaus R Trott; Edward T H Yeh; Roy E Shore Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: A Berrington de Gonzalez; R E Curtis; E Gilbert; C D Berg; S A Smith; M Stovall; E Ron Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-11-24 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Brock Lamprecht; Erika Muscat; Amanda Harding; Kate Howe; Elizabeth Brown; Tamara Barry; G Tao Mai; Margot Lehman; Anne Bernard; Catriona Hargrave; Jennifer Harvey Journal: J Med Radiat Sci Date: 2021-08-25