頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 使用EPIQA系統評估滑窗式與分段式多葉準直儀之優劣=The Comparison between Sliding MLC and Continued Step MLC by EPIQA |
---|---|
作者姓名(中文) | 蔡佩瑾; 陳祥志; 趙敏; | 書刊名 | 臺灣應用輻射與同位素雜誌 |
卷期 | 9:2 2013.06[民102.06] |
頁次 | 頁635-642 |
分類號 | 416.36 |
關鍵詞 | 滑窗式多葉準直儀; 連續分段式多葉準直儀; EPID; EPIQA; Sliding MLC; Continued Step MLC; EPID; EPIQA; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 利用電子影像驗證裝置(electronic portal image device, EPID)搭配使用Epiqa 軟體做劑量驗證來比較滑窗式 多葉準直儀(Sliding multi-leaf collimator, SM)與連續分段式多葉準直儀(Continued Step MLC, CSM)的優劣, 這個方法有別於現在常用的游離腔測量及EBT2 film。收集二十位包括下齒齦癌、乳癌、肝癌及直腸癌的病患,並分別使用SM 和CSM 這兩項技術完成治療計畫,在其餘數值不變之前提下,僅改變了多葉準直儀的移動方式,再使用EPID 接收其影像,利用Epiqa 軟體分析得到的影像,並將結果製成圖表便於分析。四種癌症SM 的mean value of γ > 1 分別為2.71 %、3.10 %、4.06 %及3.49 %皆小於可接受誤差5 %以內;而CSM 的mean value of > 1分別為6.43 %、4.82 %、6.59 %、5.16 %及4.39 %,並不完全小於可接受誤差5 %以內。細心觀察這些數據,發現SM 的技術在每個病例中都優於CSM。從實驗結果可知,劑量誤差率SM 比CSM 更低,也就是說在這次的研究發現患者使用Epiqa 驗證軟體來比較SM 與CSM,發現SM 技術顯然優於CSM。 |
英文摘要 | To compare Sliding multi-leaf collimator (SM) and Continued Step MLC (CSM) by Epiqa software, different from ion chamber measurement and EBT2 film. The research team collected twenty patients, including gingival cancer, breast cancer, H.C.C. and rectal cancer. Each case performed SM and CSM treatment plans. The authors used EPID( electronic portal image device) to receive the image instead of using films then applied Epiqa software to analyze them and compare the differences. The mean values of γ>1 of SM of the 4 cancer are 2.71%, 3.10%, 4.06% and 3.49%, respectively. As for CSM, they are 6.43%, 4.82%, 6.59% and 5.16% respectively, with one value greater than 5%, unacceptable range. Each case also shows SM has the better results than CSM, when we carefully examine all the data in the table. From this experiment, we know SM is a better technique than CSM, with lower errors, checked by Epiqa verification software. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。