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...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of contemporary brachytherapy 2019-04, Vol.11 (2), p.169-173 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
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 < 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.</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 < 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.</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 < 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.</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 |