| Cheng Zhiyao,Li Dingjie,Wu Hui,et al.Clinical application of MdaccAutoPlan in the planning of nasopharyngeal carcinoma with intensity modulated radiotherapy[J].Chinese Journal of Radiological Medicine and Protection,2018,38(4):285-290 |
| Clinical application of MdaccAutoPlan in the planning of nasopharyngeal carcinoma with intensity modulated radiotherapy |
| Received:September 09, 2017 |
| DOI：10.3760/cma.j.issn.0254-5098.2018.04.008 |
| KeyWords:MdaccAutoPlan Intensity modulated radiotherapy Treatment planning |
| FundProject: |
| Author Name | Affiliation | E-mail | | Cheng Zhiyao | Department of Radiation, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Tumor Hospital, Zhengzhou 450008, China | | | Li Dingjie | Department of Radiation, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Tumor Hospital, Zhengzhou 450008, China | 150304089@qq.com | | Wu Hui | Department of Radiation, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Tumor Hospital, Zhengzhou 450008, China | | | Huang Rong | Department of Radiation, Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Tumor Hospital, Zhengzhou 450008, China | | | Yin Xiaofang | Beijing Allcure Medical Technology Co., Ltd, Beijing 100013, China | | | Wang Feng | Beijing Allcure Medical Technology Co., Ltd, Beijing 100013, China | |
|
| Hits: 6384 |
| Download times: 2410 |
| Abstract:: |
| Objective To compare the MdaccAutoPlan (MDAP)software with Manual planning in intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) planning for nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) patients. Methods A total of 20 newly diagnosed NPC patients were enrolled and their IMRT plans were designed with MDAP software and manually, respectively with identical field angle, optimization parameters and other planning requirements. Dosimetric differences and planning efficiency were compared for these two planning method. Results The PGTV D98%, PGTV Dmean, PTV1 D98%, PTV1 Dmean, PTV2 D98%, PTV2 Dmean of plans generated from MDAP were reduced by 2.5%, 0.3%, 0.1%, 0.5%, 0.6%, 1.0%, respectively, compared with those in plans generated manually. The D2%of the PGTV, PTV1, PTV2 in MDAP plans were increased by 1.7%, 1.5%, 0.6% compared with those in manual plans, respectively. There were significant differences observed in the PGTV D98%, PGTV D2% and PTV2 D98% between these two planning method (t=5.519, 6.701, 0.937, P<0.05).The D50% of right parotidand left parotid, the Dmax, and Dmean of the spinal cord in MDAP plans were reduced significantly by 24.8%, 27.7%, 11.4%, 14.0%, respectively, compared with those in manual plans (t=5.447, 5.375, 6.786, 3.810, P<0.05). The dose of both lens increased significantly by 65.0% and 19.3%, respectively, in MDAP plans compared with Manual plans (t=9.863, 3.440, P<0.05). There was no significant dosimetric difference observed in opticnerve, opticchiasm and brainstem between these two planning method. The dose distribution of post neck in MDAP plans were better than those in manual plans.The dose-volume histogram curves of planning target volume, brainstem and spial cord in the manul plans were higher than those in the MDAP plans. The labor time of MDAP planning was reduced by 54.4% compared with Manual planning, while computer working time was increased by 34.4% with MDAP planning compared with Manual planning. Conclusions MDAP planning is clinically valualbe in its applicaion for a NPC IMRT planning with a better sparing for OARs, a decreased planning time and improvement on planning efficiency compared with manual planning. |
| HTML View Full Text View/Add Comment Download reader |
| Close |
|
|
|
