Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/16707
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorWhite, Rohen-
dc.contributor.authorForoudi, Farshad-
dc.contributor.authorSia, Joseph-
dc.contributor.authorMarr, Mary Ann-
dc.contributor.authorLim Joon, Daryl-
dc.date2016-07-28-
dc.date.accessioned2017-07-04T05:00:44Z-
dc.date.available2017-07-04T05:00:44Z-
dc.date.issued2017-06-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Medical Radiation Sciences 2017; 64(2): 120-124en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://ahro.austin.org.au/austinjspui/handle/1/16707-
dc.description.abstractINTRODUCTION: No consensus exists regarding the optimal treatment setup for neoadjuvant radiotherapy of rectal cancer using a 3D conformal (3D CRT) technique. Positioning the patient prone with a belly board aims to reduce the amount of small bowel irradiated. METHODS: Twenty-five patients with locally advanced rectal cancer underwent computed tomography (CT) planning for neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Patients were simulated prone with a belly board and then in the supine position. Questionnaires rating the comfort of each position were completed. 3D CRT plans were generated for both positions to a prescribed dose of 50.4 Gy in 1.8 Gy daily fractions. Dose-volume parameters in 5 Gy increments for small bowel, large bowel and bladder wall were compared. RESULTS: Small bowel V5 Gy, V10 Gy, V15 Gy and V20 Gy values were significantly higher in the supine position (398, 366, 245, 151 cm3 for supine vs. 243, 213, 161, 122 cm3 for prone respectively; P < 0.001, <0.001, <0.001 and 0.025). Large bowel V5 Gy, V10 Gy and V15 Gy values were significantly higher in the supine position (266, 209, 147 cm3 supine, 175, 139, 108 cm3 prone respectively; P = 0.001, <0.001, 0.003). There was a significant difference in comfort scores favouring the supine position (P = 0.015). CONCLUSION: A significant increase in small and large bowel dose was seen in the supine plans. Treatment in the prone position with a belly board may reduce toxicity when using a 3D CRT technique. Whilst both setup positions were tolerable the supine was more comfortable.en_US
dc.subjectChemoradiotherapyen_US
dc.subjectGastrointestinal tracten_US
dc.subjectRadiotherapy conformalen_US
dc.subjectRadiotherapy dosageen_US
dc.subjectRectal neoplasmsen_US
dc.titleReduced dose to small bowel with the prone position and a belly board versus the supine position in neoadjuvant 3D conformal radiotherapy for rectal adenocarcinomaen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleJournal of Medical Radiation Sciencesen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationRadiation Oncologyen_US
dc.identifier.affiliationOlivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centreen_US
dc.identifier.pubmedurihttps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27741381en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/jmrs.187en_US
dc.type.contentTexten_US
dc.type.austinJournal Articleen_US
local.name.researcherForoudi, Farshad
item.fulltextNo Fulltext-
item.grantfulltextnone-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
crisitem.author.deptOlivia Newton-John Cancer Wellness and Research Centre-
crisitem.author.deptRadiation Oncology-
crisitem.author.deptRadiation Oncology-
Appears in Collections:Journal articles
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

36
checked on Dec 28, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in AHRO are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.