FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1992008204> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1992008204 endingPage "257" @default.
• W1992008204 startingPage "251" @default.
• W1992008204 abstract "Background and purpose: Comparing some isocentric coplanar techniques for conformal irradiation of prostate and seminal vesicles. Materials and methods: Five conformal techniques have been considered: (A) a 3-fields technique with an antero-posterior (AP) field and two lateral (LAT-LAT) 30 ° wedged fields; (B) a 3-fields technique with an AP field and two oblique posterior (OBL) 15 ° wedged fields with relative weights of 0.8, 1 and 1, respectively; (C) a 4-fields technique (AP-PA and LAT-LAT); (D) a 6-fields technique (LAT-LAT and four OBL at gantry angles 45 °, 135 °, 235 ° and 315 °) with all the fields having the same weight; (E) the same 6-fields technique with lateral fields double-weighted with respect to the oblique fields. The conformal plans have been simulated on 12 consecutive patients (stages B and C) by using our 3D treatment planning system (Cadplan 2.7). The contours of the rectum, the bladder and the left femoral head were outlined together with the clinical target volume (CTV) which included the prostate and the seminal vesicles. A margin of 10 mm was added to define the planning target volume (PTV) through automatic volume expansion. Then a 7 mm margin between the PTV and block edges was added to take the beam penumbra into account. Dose distributions were normalised to the isocentre and the reference dose was considered to be 95% of the isocentre dose. Dose-volume histograms and dose statistics of the rectum, the bladder and the left femoral head were collected for all plans. For the rectum and the bladder the mean dose (Dm) and the fraction of volume receiving a dose higher than the reference dose (V95) were compared. For the femoral head, the mean dose together with the fraction of volume receiving a dose higher than 50% (V50) were compared. Results: Differences among the techniques have been found for all three considered organs at risk. When considering the rectum, technique A is better than the others both when considering Dm and V95 (P = 0.002), while technique D is the worst when considering Dm (P < 0.002) and is also worse than techniques A, E (P = 0.002) and C (P = 0.003) when considering V95. Technique E is the best when considering the bladder mean dose (P = 0.002 against A and D, P < 0.01 against B and C) and technique C is the worst (P < 0.012). No relevant differences were found for the bladder V95. In the femoral heads, techniques A and E are worse than B, C and D (P < 0.003) when considering Dm and V50. Moreover, techniques B and D are better than C (P < 0.004) when considering V50. Conclusions: There is no technique that is absolutely better than the others. Technique A gives the best sparing of the rectum; the bladder is better spared with technique E. These results are reached with a worse sparing of the femoral heads which should be carefully taken into account." @default.
• W1992008204 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1992008204 creator A5009112081 @default.
• W1992008204 creator A5031184747 @default.
• W1992008204 creator A5038760660 @default.
• W1992008204 creator A5042970272 @default.
• W1992008204 creator A5082791089 @default.
• W1992008204 date "1997-09-01" @default.
• W1992008204 modified "2023-10-14" @default.
• W1992008204 title "Comparing 3-, 4- and 6-fields techniques for conformal irradiation of prostate and seminal vesicles using dose-volume histograms" @default.
• W1992008204 cites W1965393756 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W1971765554 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W1980103504 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W1982608710 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W1984651023 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W1986068906 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W1987551106 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W1991943359 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W1993181535 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W1997593182 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2013184309 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2026652932 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2029809784 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2033497124 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2051612402 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2055164421 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2056087694 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2058524014 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2062235550 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2063960686 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2071072154 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2074080976 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2076251353 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2088299281 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2095341301 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2097512974 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2107473233 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2123650670 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2150373135 @default.
• W1992008204 cites W2468411646 @default.
• W1992008204 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0167-8140(97)00066-2" @default.
• W1992008204 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9380824" @default.
• W1992008204 hasPublicationYear "1997" @default.
• W1992008204 type Work @default.
• W1992008204 sameAs 1992008204 @default.
• W1992008204 citedByCount "38" @default.
• W1992008204 countsByYear W19920082042012 @default.
• W1992008204 countsByYear W19920082042013 @default.
• W1992008204 countsByYear W19920082042014 @default.
• W1992008204 countsByYear W19920082042016 @default.
• W1992008204 countsByYear W19920082042020 @default.
• W1992008204 countsByYear W19920082042021 @default.
• W1992008204 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1992008204 hasAuthorship W1992008204A5009112081 @default.
• W1992008204 hasAuthorship W1992008204A5031184747 @default.
• W1992008204 hasAuthorship W1992008204A5038760660 @default.
• W1992008204 hasAuthorship W1992008204A5042970272 @default.
• W1992008204 hasAuthorship W1992008204A5082791089 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C201645570 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C20556612 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C2524010 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C2776235491 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C2781074409 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C2781171107 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C2989005 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C509974204 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C62520636 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConcept C98214594 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C121332964 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C121608353 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C126322002 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C126838900 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C141071460 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C201645570 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C20556612 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C2524010 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C2776235491 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C2781074409 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C2781171107 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C2989005 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C33923547 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C509974204 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C62520636 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C71924100 @default.
• W1992008204 hasConceptScore W1992008204C98214594 @default.
• W1992008204 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W1992008204 hasLocation W19920082041 @default.
• W1992008204 hasLocation W19920082042 @default.
• W1992008204 hasOpenAccess W1992008204 @default.
• W1992008204 hasPrimaryLocation W19920082041 @default.
• W1992008204 hasRelatedWork W1964642503 @default.

• next