Dear Authors,
If you believe that your paper was mistakenly rejected by other leading journals and you do not agree with final decision, the editors of Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy offer new fast track review. You may submit your manuscript to Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy together with all prior peer-reviews obtained from the other journal and your rebuttal letter. We guarantee review based decision within 72 hours from the time we will receive your manuscript.

Fast track submission process: Please submit the manuscript with all reviews and rebuttal letter by email to Dr. Michal Masternak (michal.masternak@ucf.edu) for fast review processing. To assure immediate attention the email title must to include: RPOR-fast track- Last Name First Name (of corresponding author).

Volume 22, Number 4, 2017

Utility of intraoral stents in external beam radiotherapy for head and neck cancer

Hiroshi Doi, Masao Tanooka, Toshihisa Ishida, Kuniyasu Moridera, Kenji Ichimiya, Kazuo Tarutani, Kazuhiro Kitajima, Masayuki Fujiwara, Hiromitsu Kishimoto, Norihiko Kamikonya

Summary:

Aim

This study aimed to assess the utility and stability of intraoral stent during intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).

Background

The benefits of intraoral stents in radiotherapy are unclear.

Materials and methods

We analyzed 386 setup errors in 12 patients who received IMRT for head and neck cancers without intraoral stents (intraoral stent [−]) and 183 setup errors in 6 patients who received IMRT with intraoral stents (intraoral stent [+]). All patients were matched according to the immobilization method (masks and boards). Setup errors were measured as the distance from the initial setup based on the marking on the skin and mask to the corrected position based on bone matching on cone beam computed tomography.

Results

The mean interfractional setup errors in the right–left, craniocaudal, anterior–posterior (AP), and three-dimensional (3D) directions were −0.33, 0.08, −0.25, and 2.75 mm in the intraoral stent (−) group and −0.37, 0.24, −0.63, and 2.42 mm in the intraoral stent (+) group, respectively (P = 0.50, 0.65, 0.01, and 0.02, respectively). The systematic errors for the same directions were 0.89, 1.46, 1.15, and 0.88 mm in the intraoral stent (−) group and 0.62, 1.69, 0.68, and 0.56 mm in the intraoral stents (+) group, respectively. The random errors were 1.43, 1.43, 1.44, and 1.22 mm in the intraoral stent (−) group and 1.06, 1.11, 1.05, and 0.92 mm in the intraoral stents (+) group, respectively.

Conclusion

Setup errors can be significantly reduced in the AP and 3D-directions by using intraoral stents.

Signature: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, 2017; 22(4) : 310-318


« back

 
INDEXED IN:

Indexed in: EMBASE®, the Excerpta Medica database, the Elsevier BIOBASE (Current Awareness in Biological Sciences) and in the Index Copernicus.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/15071367/19/2