Scholarlink

<p>For cervical cancer radiotherapy, patients requiring inguinal lymphatic drainage (ILD) extension fields pose challenges due to the large and complex target volume. To investigate the dosimetric effects of x-jaw width, jaw aperture position, and the number of arcs on volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for ILD extension fields, in order to optimize treatment planning. Thirty-nine patients were retrospectively included, and seven VMAT planning groups were created: OF (open field), X = 15/16/17/18 (jaw widths of 15–18&#xa0;cm), SP (split-field, four arcs), and X = 15&#xa0;M (jaw aperture moved toward the isocenter). Dosimetric parameters, including homogeneity index (HI), target coverage, and organs-at-risk (OARs) doses, were compared. The X = 15 plan achieved significantly lower intestinal, bladder, and rectal doses compared to the X = 17 and X = 18 plans (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05). The SP plan demonstrated superior HI and OARs sparing compared to the X = 15 plan, but required longer treatment times. The X = 15&#xa0;M plan resulted in reduced edge doses but increased intestinal and bladder doses. For cervical cancer ILD extension fields, dual-arc VMAT plans with a 15&#xa0;cm jaw width (X = 15) are recommended for optimal balance between target coverage and OARs sparing. Split-field plans may be considered if extended treatment time is acceptable.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Dosimetric evaluation of field parameters in VMAT for cervical cancer with inguinal lymphatic drainage extension

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年7月19日

查看全文
  • Jing Zeng,
  • Jinlong Hao,
  • Jianguo Zhao,
  • Peisong Sun

摘要

For cervical cancer radiotherapy, patients requiring inguinal lymphatic drainage (ILD) extension fields pose challenges due to the large and complex target volume. To investigate the dosimetric effects of x-jaw width, jaw aperture position, and the number of arcs on volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans for ILD extension fields, in order to optimize treatment planning. Thirty-nine patients were retrospectively included, and seven VMAT planning groups were created: OF (open field), X = 15/16/17/18 (jaw widths of 15–18 cm), SP (split-field, four arcs), and X = 15 M (jaw aperture moved toward the isocenter). Dosimetric parameters, including homogeneity index (HI), target coverage, and organs-at-risk (OARs) doses, were compared. The X = 15 plan achieved significantly lower intestinal, bladder, and rectal doses compared to the X = 17 and X = 18 plans (p < 0.05). The SP plan demonstrated superior HI and OARs sparing compared to the X = 15 plan, but required longer treatment times. The X = 15 M plan resulted in reduced edge doses but increased intestinal and bladder doses. For cervical cancer ILD extension fields, dual-arc VMAT plans with a 15 cm jaw width (X = 15) are recommended for optimal balance between target coverage and OARs sparing. Split-field plans may be considered if extended treatment time is acceptable.