Assessment of rectal dose with thermoluminescent in vivo dosimetry in high-dose-rate cobalt-60 intracavitary brachytherapy for cervical cancer: A two-arm cohort study using orthogonal images planning
Résumé fourni par la source
Purpose: High-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy delivers high radiation doses to tumors while minimizing exposure to surrounding normal cells. However, inappropriate administration can lead to radiation-induced toxicity by overdosing organs at risk. This study evaluated and compared the rectum doses planned by treatment planning system and measured using a thermoluminescent dosimeter. Material and methods: Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD) were employed to measure radiation dose to the rectum across two patient groups: one treated using first fraction-based planning (FFP), and the other with each fraction planned individually (EFP). Results: < 0.001). The mean dose difference was higher in second fraction (0.87 ±1.89 Gy) for first fraction-based planning group; however, the differences between first and second fractions were not statistically significant in either group. Conclusions: For patients transferred from a brachytherapy couch to a hospital stretcher during applicator insertion and dose delivery, first fraction-based planning is feasible. However, caution is needed to minimize applicator shifts, as these changes can alter the geometric position between fractions.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Assessment of rectal dose with thermoluminescent in vivo dosimetry in high-dose-rate cobalt-60 intracavitary brachytherapy for cervical cancer: A two-arm cohort study using orthogonal images planning
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2025
- Éditeur
- Termedia Sp. z.o.o.
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.