A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Investigation of interfraction variations of MammoSite balloon applicator in high-dose-rate brachytherapy of partial breast irradiation. | LitMetric

Purpose: To measure the interfraction changes of the MammoSite applicator and evaluate their dosimetric effect on target coverage and sparing of organs at risk.

Methods And Materials: A retrospective evaluation of the data from 19 patients who received 10 fractions (34 Gy) of high-dose-rate partial breast irradiation was performed. A computed tomography-based treatment plan was generated for Fraction 1, and a computed tomography scan was acquired just before the delivery of each fraction to ensure a consistent shape of the balloon. The eccentricity, asymmetry, and planning target volume (PTV) for plan evaluation purposes (PTV_EVAL), as well as trapped air gaps, were measured for all patients. Furthermore, 169 computed tomography-based treatment plans were retrospectively generated for Fractions 2-10. Interfraction dosimetric variations were evaluated using the %PTV_EVAL coverage, target dose homogeneity index, target dose conformal index, and maximum doses to the organs at risks.

Results: The average variation of eccentricity and asymmetry from Fraction 1 values of 3.5% and 1.1 mm was -0.4% +/- 1.6% and -0.1 +/- 0.6 mm. The average trapped air gap volume was dramatically reduced from before treatment (3.7 cm(3)) to Fraction 1 (0.8 cm(3)). The PTV_EVAL volume change was insignificant. The average variation for the %PTV_EVAL, target dose homogeneity, and target dose conformal index from Fraction 1 values of 94.7%, 0.64, and 0.85 was 0.15% +/- 2.4%, -0.35 +/- 2.4%, and -0.34 +/- 4.9%, respectively. The average Fraction 1 maximum skin and ipsilateral lung dose of 3.2 Gy and 2.0 Gy varied by 0.08 +/- 0.47 and -0.16 +/- 0.29 Gy, respectively.

Conclusion: The interfraction variations were patient specific and fraction dependent. Although the average interfraction dose variations for the target and organs at risk were not clinically significant, the maximum variations could be clinically significant.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.01.024DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

target dose
16
interfraction variations
8
partial breast
8
breast irradiation
8
computed tomography-based
8
tomography-based treatment
8
eccentricity asymmetry
8
trapped air
8
dose homogeneity
8
homogeneity target
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!