Three-Dimensional Evaluation of Isodose Radiation Volumes in Cases of Severe Mandibular Osteoradionecrosis for the Prediction of Recurrence after Segmental Resection.
computer assisted surgery
mandible
osteoradionecrosis
radiotherapy
surgery
virtual surgical planning
Journal
Journal of personalized medicine
ISSN: 2075-4426
Titre abrégé: J Pers Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101602269
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
20 May 2022
20 May 2022
Historique:
received:
13
04
2022
revised:
13
05
2022
accepted:
16
05
2022
entrez:
28
5
2022
pubmed:
29
5
2022
medline:
29
5
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Pre-operative margin planning for the segmental resection of affected bone in mandibular osteoradionecrosis (ORN) is difficult. The aim of this study was to identify a possible relation between the received RT dose, exposed bone volume and the progression of ORN after segmental mandibular resection. Patients diagnosed with grade 3-4 ORN for which a segmental resection was performed were included in the study. Three-dimensional reconstructions of RT isodose volumes were fused with postoperative imaging. The primary outcome was the recurrence of ORN after segmental resection. Subsequently, RT exposed mandibular bone volumes were calculated and the location of the bone cuts relative to the isodose volumes were assessed. Five out of thirty-three patients developed recurrent ORN after segmental mandibular resection. All cases with recurrent ORN were resected inside an isodose volume of ≥56 Gy. The absolute mandibular volume radiated with 56 Gy was significantly smaller in the recurrent group (10.9 mL vs. 30.7 mL, The volume of radiated bone was not predictive for risk of progression. The finding that recurrent ORN occurred with bone resection margins within the 56 Gy isodose volume suggests that this could serve as a starting point for the pre-operative planning of reducing the risk of ORN recurrence.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Pre-operative margin planning for the segmental resection of affected bone in mandibular osteoradionecrosis (ORN) is difficult. The aim of this study was to identify a possible relation between the received RT dose, exposed bone volume and the progression of ORN after segmental mandibular resection.
METHOD
METHODS
Patients diagnosed with grade 3-4 ORN for which a segmental resection was performed were included in the study. Three-dimensional reconstructions of RT isodose volumes were fused with postoperative imaging. The primary outcome was the recurrence of ORN after segmental resection. Subsequently, RT exposed mandibular bone volumes were calculated and the location of the bone cuts relative to the isodose volumes were assessed.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Five out of thirty-three patients developed recurrent ORN after segmental mandibular resection. All cases with recurrent ORN were resected inside an isodose volume of ≥56 Gy. The absolute mandibular volume radiated with 56 Gy was significantly smaller in the recurrent group (10.9 mL vs. 30.7 mL,
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The volume of radiated bone was not predictive for risk of progression. The finding that recurrent ORN occurred with bone resection margins within the 56 Gy isodose volume suggests that this could serve as a starting point for the pre-operative planning of reducing the risk of ORN recurrence.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35629256
pii: jpm12050834
doi: 10.3390/jpm12050834
pmc: PMC9143211
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1991 May 15;21(1):109-22
pubmed: 2032882
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009 Nov 15;75(4):1084-91
pubmed: 19327914
Am J Clin Oncol. 2018 Dec;41(12):1276-1280
pubmed: 29360644
Acta Oncol. 2019 Oct;58(10):1373-1377
pubmed: 31364903
Strahlenther Onkol. 2004 Apr;180(4):233-40
pubmed: 15057434
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007 Mar;65(3):434-8
pubmed: 17307589
Strahlenther Onkol. 2016 Jan;192(1):32-9
pubmed: 26265308
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Feb;47(2):214-219
pubmed: 28882499
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003 Jun;32(3):289-95
pubmed: 12767877
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2018 Nov;119(5):389-394
pubmed: 29680775
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1983 May;41(5):283-8
pubmed: 6572704
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1980 May;6(5):543-8
pubmed: 7410128
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020 Dec 1;108(5):1319-1328
pubmed: 32712257
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009 Aug;141(2):196-201
pubmed: 19643251
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007 Jun 1;68(2):396-402
pubmed: 17321069
Am J Otolaryngol. 2012 Sep-Oct;33(5):576-80
pubmed: 22521236
Radiol Clin North Am. 2018 Jan;56(1):77-89
pubmed: 29157550
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016 Dec;20(4):337-342
pubmed: 27401528
J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2015 Dec;14(4):891-901
pubmed: 26604460
Strahlenther Onkol. 2006 May;182(5):283-8
pubmed: 16673062
Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2018 Nov 1;23(6):e633-e638
pubmed: 30341256
J Nucl Med. 2009 Jan;50(1):30-5
pubmed: 19091894
Radiother Oncol. 2017 Aug;124(2):232-239
pubmed: 28733053
Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016 Dec;45(12):1592-1599
pubmed: 27427547
Radiother Oncol. 1995 Aug;36(2):94-100
pubmed: 7501817
J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015 Oct;43(8):1374-9
pubmed: 26302937
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013 Feb 1;85(2):415-20
pubmed: 22795804
J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1983 Jun;41(6):351-7
pubmed: 6574217
J Korean Assoc Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019 Feb;45(1):21-28
pubmed: 30847293