|
KMID : 0602519950010010115
|
|
Dankook Medical Journal
1995 Volume.1 No. 1 p.115 ~ p.122
|
|
|
Comparison of the Radiation Dose of Bladder and Rectum according to Patient Position in Intracavitary Radiation of the Uterine Cervix Cancer
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
Background:
@EN Radiation proctitis and cystitis are frequent and problematic late complications in patients treated with radiation for the uterine cervix cancer. So, authors tried to find out the better patient's position in high dose rate intracavitary
radiation
to reduce the radiation dose of bladder and rectum.
@ES Methods:
@EN In 6 patients, Foley catheters were inserted to patients' bladder and rectum and were ballooned with radioopaque dye. Semi-orthogonal anteroposterior and lateral films were taken in both lithotomy and supine position. Using these films, all
patients' bladder and rectum dose were calculated in both positions (the radiation dose of A point was set to 400 cGy in intact uterus cases and that at 0.5 cm depth from the surface of vaginal fornix was set to 400-1000 cGy in hysterectomized
cases).
@ES Results:
@EN Of 3 patients with intact uterus, the radiation dose of rectum and bladder were 103 cGy and 482 cGy in lithotomy position and 145 cGy and 444 cGy in supine position for one, and those were 136 cGy and 199 cGy in lithotomy position and 170 cGy
and
224 cGy in supine position for another, and those were 228 cGy and 391 cGy in lithotomy position and 233 cGy and 364 cGy in supine position for the other. Of 3 hysterectomized patients, the radiation dose of rectum and bladder were 182 cGy and
288
cGy
in lithotomy position and 195 cGy and 328 cGy in supine position for one and those were 223 cGy and 94 cGy in lithotomy position and 278 cGy and 80 cGy in supine position for another, and those were 194 cGy and 245 cGy in lithotomy position and
232
cGy
and 291 cGy in supine position for the other. Thus, the radiation dose of rectum was significantly lower in lithotomy position than that in supine position, while that of bladder was not significantly different from each other.
@ES conclusion:
@EN By using lithotomy position the rectal dose was reduced while the bladder dose was maintained.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
|
|
|