Dosimetric impact of tracheostomy devices in head and neck cancer patients.
head and neck cancer
optically stimulated luminescent dosimetry
radiation therapy
tracheostomy devices
Journal
Journal of applied clinical medical physics
ISSN: 1526-9914
Titre abrégé: J Appl Clin Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101089176
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2020
Jun 2020
Historique:
received:
11
08
2019
revised:
26
02
2020
accepted:
29
02
2020
pubmed:
7
5
2020
medline:
27
5
2021
entrez:
7
5
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The tracheostomy site and adjacent skin is at risk for recurrence in head/neck squamous cell cancer patients. The tracheostomy tube is an in situ device located directly over the tracheostomy site and may have clinical implications on the radiation dose delivered to the peristomal region. This study aimed to investigate this effect by comparing the prescribed treatment planning dose with the actual dose in vivo to the peristomal clinical target region. A retrospective, dosimetric study was performed with approval of the institutional research ethics board. Fifteen patients who had received high-dose radiotherapy to the tracheostomy region with in vivo dose measurements were included. The radiation dose at the skin surface underneath the tracheostomy device was measured using an optically stimulated luminescent dosimeter (OSLD) and was compared with the prescribed dose from the radiation planning system. The effect of the tracheostomy flange and/or soft tissue equivalent bolus on the peristomal dose was calculated. Patients with tracheostomy equipment in situ were found to have a 3.7% difference between their prescribed and actual dose. With a tissue equivalent bolus there was a 2.0% difference between predicted and actual. The mean prescribed single fraction dose (mean = 191.8 cGy, SD = 40.18) and OSLD measured dose (mean = 194.02 cGy, SD = 44.3) were found to have no significant difference. However, with the flange excluded from the planning simulation (density = air) target skin dose deviated from predicted by an average of 55.3% (range = 12.4-72.9, SD = 22.5) and volume coverage was not achieved. In summary, the tracheostomy flange acts like bolus with a twofold increase in the skin surface dose. Changes in the peristomal apparatus from simulation to treatment needs to be considered to ensure that the simulated dose and coverage is achieved.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32374922
doi: 10.1002/acm2.12862
pmc: PMC7324706
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
26-32Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Références
PLoS One. 2015 Jun 08;10(6):e0128544
pubmed: 26052690
Head Neck Surg. 1987 Sep-Oct;10(1):19-30
pubmed: 3449477
Med Phys. 2014 Aug;41(8):081720
pubmed: 25086530
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011 Jul 1;80(3):669-76
pubmed: 20547443
Med Phys. 2018 Apr;45(4):e53-e83
pubmed: 29443390
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2009 May 28;10(3):2886
pubmed: 19692972
Head Neck. 2008 Mar;30(3):281-8
pubmed: 17764087
Cancer. 1988 Aug 15;62(4):802-5
pubmed: 3395961
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010 Apr;76(5):1333-8
pubmed: 19540060
J Laryngol Otol. 2001 Mar;115(3):202-4
pubmed: 11244526
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1996 Apr;114(4):569-75
pubmed: 8643266
Med Phys. 2007 Dec;34(12):4594-604
pubmed: 18196786
Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2005 Jun;99(6):743-7
pubmed: 15897862
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000 Mar 15;46(5):1117-26
pubmed: 10725621
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2006 Winter;7(1):21-34
pubmed: 16518314
Phys Med Biol. 2008 Oct 21;53(20):R351-79
pubmed: 18799833
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Dec;18(12):e742-e753
pubmed: 29208440
Med Phys. 2003 Jun;30(6):1162-82
pubmed: 12852541
Med Phys. 2005 Feb;32(2):380-8
pubmed: 15789583
Med Phys. 2010 Aug;37(8):4078-101
pubmed: 20879569
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2012 Sep;24(7):474-87
pubmed: 22770590
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Jun 20;28(18):2996-3001
pubmed: 20479390
Med Phys. 1998 Oct;25(10):1773-829
pubmed: 9800687
Med Phys. 2010 May;37(5):2043-53
pubmed: 20527537
Med Phys. 2005 Aug;32(8):2682-9
pubmed: 16193799