http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
Sarthak Tandon,Munish Gairola,Parveen Ahlawat,Kanika Sharma,Soumitra Barik,Nishtha Sachdeva,Sunil Pasricha,Apeksha Shenoy 대한방사선종양학회 2018 Radiation Oncology Journal Vol.36 No.4
Surgical excision along with use of postoperative radiotherapy forms an integral management of sinonasal teratocarcinosarcoma (SNTCS). However, given the rarity of the tumor, no standardised guidelines, dose, technique and target delineation exist especially in the era of modern radiation delivery techniques. This is a case of 55-year-old male diagnosed as SNTCS treated with radical ethmoidectomy followed by volumetric modulated radiotherapy, showing good local control and acceptable toxicity profile.
Tandon, Sarthak,Gairola, Munish,Ahlawat, Parveen,Sharma, Kanika,Barik, Soumitra,Sachdeva, Nishtha,Pasricha, Sunil,Shenoy, Apeksha The Korean Society for Radiation Oncology 2018 Radiation Oncology Journal Vol.36 No.4
Surgical excision along with use of postoperative radiotherapy forms an integral management of sinonasal teratocarcinosarcoma (SNTCS). However, given the rarity of the tumor, no standardised guidelines, dose, technique and target delineation exist especially in the era of modern radiation delivery techniques. This is a case of 55-year-old male diagnosed as SNTCS treated with radical ethmoidectomy followed by volumetric modulated radiotherapy, showing good local control and acceptable toxicity profile.
Kumar, Gourav,Bhushan, Manindra,Kumar, Lalit,Kishore, Vimal,Raman, Kothanda,Kumar, Pawan,Barik, Soumitra,Purohit, Sandeep Korean Society of Medical Physics 2021 의학물리 Vol.32 No.3
Purpose: This study was designed to investigate the dosimetric difference between intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in head and neck cancer (HNC). The study primarily focuses on low-dose spillage evaluation between these two techniques. Methods: This retrospective study involved 45 patients with HNC. The treatment plans were generated using the IMRT and VMAT techniques for all patients. Dosimetric comparisons were performed in terms of target coverage, organ-at-risk (OAR) sparing, and various parameters, including conformity index, uniformity index, homogeneity index, conformation number, low-dose volumes, and normal tissue integral dose (NTID). Results: No significant (P>0.05) difference in planning target volume coverage (D<sub>95%</sub>) was observed between IMRT and VMAT plans for supraglottic larynx, hard palate, and tongue cancers. A decrease in dose volumes ranging from 1 Gy to 30 Gy was observed for VMAT plans compared with those for IMRT plans, except for V<sub>1Gy</sub> and V<sub>30Gy</sub> for supraglottic larynx cancer and V<sub>1Gy</sub> for tongue cancer. Moreover, decreases (P<0.05) in NTID were observed for VMAT plans compared with that for IMRT plans in supraglottic larynx (4.50%), hard palate (12.80%), and tongue (7.76%) cancers. In contrast, a slight increase in monitor units for VMAT compared with those for IMRT in supraglottic larynx (0.46%), hard palate (2.54%), and tongue (7.56%) cancers. Conclusions: For advanced-stage HNC, both IMRT and VMAT offer satisfactory clinical plans. VMAT offers a conformal and homogeneous dose distribution with comparable OAR sparing and higher dose falloff outside the target volume than IMRT, which provides an edge to reduce the risk of secondary malignancies for HNC over IMRT.