Loading…

Comparative study for CT-guided 125 I seed implantation assisted by 3D printing coplanar and non-coplanar template in peripheral lung cancer

We compared the three-dimensional printed non-coplanar template (3DPNCT) plans with 3D-printed coplanar template (3DPCT) plans for radioactive seed implantation (RSI) in lung cancer and explored the differences between the two technologies. 33 patients with peripheral lung cancer that received 3DPCT...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of contemporary brachytherapy 2019-04, Vol.11 (2), p.169-173
Main Authors: Ji, Zhe, Sun, Haitao, Jiang, Yuliang, Guo, Fuxin, Peng, Ran, Fan, Jinghong, Wang, Junjie
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2133-5b10f91b1dca8db84630056c42aa5c9b64b53df95799cd1e44b6f263298f06613
cites
container_end_page 173
container_issue 2
container_start_page 169
container_title Journal of contemporary brachytherapy
container_volume 11
creator Ji, Zhe
Sun, Haitao
Jiang, Yuliang
Guo, Fuxin
Peng, Ran
Fan, Jinghong
Wang, Junjie
description We compared the three-dimensional printed non-coplanar template (3DPNCT) plans with 3D-printed coplanar template (3DPCT) plans for radioactive seed implantation (RSI) in lung cancer and explored the differences between the two technologies. 33 patients with peripheral lung cancer that received 3DPCT-assisted RSI in our department between June 2017 and February 2018 were analyzed. A 3DPNCT plan was re-designed for all patients. The prescribed dose and seed activity in the new plan were the same as the 3DPCT plan. The data in the two plans were compared, including seed number, needle number, number of needles needed to cross the ribs, and dosimetry parameters. Dosimetry parameters included D , D , MPD (minimum peripheral dose), V , V , CI (conformity index), EI (external index), HI (homogeneity index) of target volume, D of spinal cord and aorta, and V of affected side lung. We used a paired -test and two groups of related non-parameters tests to examine statistical significance. A value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We found no significant difference in dosimetry parameters ( > 0.05), except MPD. The mean MPD of the 3DPNCT plan was significantly higher than the 3DPCT plan (88.5 Gy and 81.8 Gy, respectively, = 0.017). The number of needles used in the 3DPNCT plan and the number of needles needed to cross the ribs were significantly less compared with the 3DPCT plan ( = 0.000). The dose distributions of the two 3DPCT plans were similar. 3DPNCT plan had a higher dose in target volume margin, with fewer needles and fewer breaks to the ribs.
doi_str_mv 10.5114/jcb.2019.84503
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>pubmed_doaj_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_aee384f27ba9491d93f645420ac75f58</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_aee384f27ba9491d93f645420ac75f58</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>31139226</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2133-5b10f91b1dca8db84630056c42aa5c9b64b53df95799cd1e44b6f263298f06613</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kc1qGzEUhUVpady02y6LXmBc_VtaFrdJDIFuUshOXP25MmPNII0Lfoc-dGbi1itdDud8CD6EPlOylpSKrwfv1oxQs9ZCEv4GrRjRtGNa0LdoRZU2nebs-QZ9aO1AiDKMyPfohlPKDWNqhf5uh-MIFab8J-I2ncIZp6Hi7VO3P-UQA6ZM4h1ucT7zceyhTHN3KBhay22aU3fG_Dseay5TLnvsh6UEFUMJuAyluwZTXPZTxLngMdY8_o4VetyflhUUH-tH9C5B3-Knf-8t-nX342n70D3-vN9tvz12nlHOO-koSYY6Gjzo4LRQnBCpvGAA0hunhJM8JCM3xvhAoxBOJaY4MzoRpSi_RbsLNwxwsPPXj1DPdoBsX4Oh7i3UKfs-WoiRa5HYxoERhgbDkxJSMAJ-I5PUM2t9Yfk6tFZjuvIosYsiOyuyiyL7qmgefLkMxpM7xnCt_3fCXwD6pY0x</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparative study for CT-guided 125 I seed implantation assisted by 3D printing coplanar and non-coplanar template in peripheral lung cancer</title><source>Open Access: PubMed Central</source><source>Publicly Available Content Database</source><creator>Ji, Zhe ; Sun, Haitao ; Jiang, Yuliang ; Guo, Fuxin ; Peng, Ran ; Fan, Jinghong ; Wang, Junjie</creator><creatorcontrib>Ji, Zhe ; Sun, Haitao ; Jiang, Yuliang ; Guo, Fuxin ; Peng, Ran ; Fan, Jinghong ; Wang, Junjie</creatorcontrib><description>We compared the three-dimensional printed non-coplanar template (3DPNCT) plans with 3D-printed coplanar template (3DPCT) plans for radioactive seed implantation (RSI) in lung cancer and explored the differences between the two technologies. 33 patients with peripheral lung cancer that received 3DPCT-assisted RSI in our department between June 2017 and February 2018 were analyzed. A 3DPNCT plan was re-designed for all patients. The prescribed dose and seed activity in the new plan were the same as the 3DPCT plan. The data in the two plans were compared, including seed number, needle number, number of needles needed to cross the ribs, and dosimetry parameters. Dosimetry parameters included D , D , MPD (minimum peripheral dose), V , V , CI (conformity index), EI (external index), HI (homogeneity index) of target volume, D of spinal cord and aorta, and V of affected side lung. We used a paired -test and two groups of related non-parameters tests to examine statistical significance. A value &lt; 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We found no significant difference in dosimetry parameters ( &gt; 0.05), except MPD. The mean MPD of the 3DPNCT plan was significantly higher than the 3DPCT plan (88.5 Gy and 81.8 Gy, respectively, = 0.017). The number of needles used in the 3DPNCT plan and the number of needles needed to cross the ribs were significantly less compared with the 3DPCT plan ( = 0.000). The dose distributions of the two 3DPCT plans were similar. 3DPNCT plan had a higher dose in target volume margin, with fewer needles and fewer breaks to the ribs.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1689-832X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2081-2841</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2019.84503</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31139226</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Poland: Termedia Publishing House</publisher><subject>3d printing template ; dosimetry ; peripheral lung cancer ; seed implantation</subject><ispartof>Journal of contemporary brachytherapy, 2019-04, Vol.11 (2), p.169-173</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2133-5b10f91b1dca8db84630056c42aa5c9b64b53df95799cd1e44b6f263298f06613</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31139226$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Ji, Zhe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sun, Haitao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Yuliang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guo, Fuxin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peng, Ran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fan, Jinghong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Junjie</creatorcontrib><title>Comparative study for CT-guided 125 I seed implantation assisted by 3D printing coplanar and non-coplanar template in peripheral lung cancer</title><title>Journal of contemporary brachytherapy</title><addtitle>J Contemp Brachytherapy</addtitle><description>We compared the three-dimensional printed non-coplanar template (3DPNCT) plans with 3D-printed coplanar template (3DPCT) plans for radioactive seed implantation (RSI) in lung cancer and explored the differences between the two technologies. 33 patients with peripheral lung cancer that received 3DPCT-assisted RSI in our department between June 2017 and February 2018 were analyzed. A 3DPNCT plan was re-designed for all patients. The prescribed dose and seed activity in the new plan were the same as the 3DPCT plan. The data in the two plans were compared, including seed number, needle number, number of needles needed to cross the ribs, and dosimetry parameters. Dosimetry parameters included D , D , MPD (minimum peripheral dose), V , V , CI (conformity index), EI (external index), HI (homogeneity index) of target volume, D of spinal cord and aorta, and V of affected side lung. We used a paired -test and two groups of related non-parameters tests to examine statistical significance. A value &lt; 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We found no significant difference in dosimetry parameters ( &gt; 0.05), except MPD. The mean MPD of the 3DPNCT plan was significantly higher than the 3DPCT plan (88.5 Gy and 81.8 Gy, respectively, = 0.017). The number of needles used in the 3DPNCT plan and the number of needles needed to cross the ribs were significantly less compared with the 3DPCT plan ( = 0.000). The dose distributions of the two 3DPCT plans were similar. 3DPNCT plan had a higher dose in target volume margin, with fewer needles and fewer breaks to the ribs.</description><subject>3d printing template</subject><subject>dosimetry</subject><subject>peripheral lung cancer</subject><subject>seed implantation</subject><issn>1689-832X</issn><issn>2081-2841</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNo9kc1qGzEUhUVpady02y6LXmBc_VtaFrdJDIFuUshOXP25MmPNII0Lfoc-dGbi1itdDud8CD6EPlOylpSKrwfv1oxQs9ZCEv4GrRjRtGNa0LdoRZU2nebs-QZ9aO1AiDKMyPfohlPKDWNqhf5uh-MIFab8J-I2ncIZp6Hi7VO3P-UQA6ZM4h1ucT7zceyhTHN3KBhay22aU3fG_Dseay5TLnvsh6UEFUMJuAyluwZTXPZTxLngMdY8_o4VetyflhUUH-tH9C5B3-Knf-8t-nX342n70D3-vN9tvz12nlHOO-koSYY6Gjzo4LRQnBCpvGAA0hunhJM8JCM3xvhAoxBOJaY4MzoRpSi_RbsLNwxwsPPXj1DPdoBsX4Oh7i3UKfs-WoiRa5HYxoERhgbDkxJSMAJ-I5PUM2t9Yfk6tFZjuvIosYsiOyuyiyL7qmgefLkMxpM7xnCt_3fCXwD6pY0x</recordid><startdate>201904</startdate><enddate>201904</enddate><creator>Ji, Zhe</creator><creator>Sun, Haitao</creator><creator>Jiang, Yuliang</creator><creator>Guo, Fuxin</creator><creator>Peng, Ran</creator><creator>Fan, Jinghong</creator><creator>Wang, Junjie</creator><general>Termedia Publishing House</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>DOA</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201904</creationdate><title>Comparative study for CT-guided 125 I seed implantation assisted by 3D printing coplanar and non-coplanar template in peripheral lung cancer</title><author>Ji, Zhe ; Sun, Haitao ; Jiang, Yuliang ; Guo, Fuxin ; Peng, Ran ; Fan, Jinghong ; Wang, Junjie</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2133-5b10f91b1dca8db84630056c42aa5c9b64b53df95799cd1e44b6f263298f06613</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>3d printing template</topic><topic>dosimetry</topic><topic>peripheral lung cancer</topic><topic>seed implantation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Ji, Zhe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sun, Haitao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jiang, Yuliang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guo, Fuxin</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Peng, Ran</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fan, Jinghong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Junjie</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>Journal of contemporary brachytherapy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Ji, Zhe</au><au>Sun, Haitao</au><au>Jiang, Yuliang</au><au>Guo, Fuxin</au><au>Peng, Ran</au><au>Fan, Jinghong</au><au>Wang, Junjie</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparative study for CT-guided 125 I seed implantation assisted by 3D printing coplanar and non-coplanar template in peripheral lung cancer</atitle><jtitle>Journal of contemporary brachytherapy</jtitle><addtitle>J Contemp Brachytherapy</addtitle><date>2019-04</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>11</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>169</spage><epage>173</epage><pages>169-173</pages><issn>1689-832X</issn><eissn>2081-2841</eissn><abstract>We compared the three-dimensional printed non-coplanar template (3DPNCT) plans with 3D-printed coplanar template (3DPCT) plans for radioactive seed implantation (RSI) in lung cancer and explored the differences between the two technologies. 33 patients with peripheral lung cancer that received 3DPCT-assisted RSI in our department between June 2017 and February 2018 were analyzed. A 3DPNCT plan was re-designed for all patients. The prescribed dose and seed activity in the new plan were the same as the 3DPCT plan. The data in the two plans were compared, including seed number, needle number, number of needles needed to cross the ribs, and dosimetry parameters. Dosimetry parameters included D , D , MPD (minimum peripheral dose), V , V , CI (conformity index), EI (external index), HI (homogeneity index) of target volume, D of spinal cord and aorta, and V of affected side lung. We used a paired -test and two groups of related non-parameters tests to examine statistical significance. A value &lt; 0.05 was considered statistically significant. We found no significant difference in dosimetry parameters ( &gt; 0.05), except MPD. The mean MPD of the 3DPNCT plan was significantly higher than the 3DPCT plan (88.5 Gy and 81.8 Gy, respectively, = 0.017). The number of needles used in the 3DPNCT plan and the number of needles needed to cross the ribs were significantly less compared with the 3DPCT plan ( = 0.000). The dose distributions of the two 3DPCT plans were similar. 3DPNCT plan had a higher dose in target volume margin, with fewer needles and fewer breaks to the ribs.</abstract><cop>Poland</cop><pub>Termedia Publishing House</pub><pmid>31139226</pmid><doi>10.5114/jcb.2019.84503</doi><tpages>5</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1689-832X
ispartof Journal of contemporary brachytherapy, 2019-04, Vol.11 (2), p.169-173
issn 1689-832X
2081-2841
language eng
recordid cdi_doaj_primary_oai_doaj_org_article_aee384f27ba9491d93f645420ac75f58
source Open Access: PubMed Central; Publicly Available Content Database
subjects 3d printing template
dosimetry
peripheral lung cancer
seed implantation
title Comparative study for CT-guided 125 I seed implantation assisted by 3D printing coplanar and non-coplanar template in peripheral lung cancer
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T00%3A18%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-pubmed_doaj_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparative%20study%20for%20CT-guided%20125%20I%20seed%20implantation%20assisted%20by%203D%20printing%20coplanar%20and%20non-coplanar%20template%20in%20peripheral%20lung%20cancer&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20contemporary%20brachytherapy&rft.au=Ji,%20Zhe&rft.date=2019-04&rft.volume=11&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=169&rft.epage=173&rft.pages=169-173&rft.issn=1689-832X&rft.eissn=2081-2841&rft_id=info:doi/10.5114/jcb.2019.84503&rft_dat=%3Cpubmed_doaj_%3E31139226%3C/pubmed_doaj_%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2133-5b10f91b1dca8db84630056c42aa5c9b64b53df95799cd1e44b6f263298f06613%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/31139226&rfr_iscdi=true