Journal of Medical Physics
 Home | Search | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscription | Login  The official journal of AMPI, IOMP and AFOMP      
 Users online: 470  Home  EMail this page Print this page Decrease font size Default font size Increase font size 
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 43  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 79-84

Dosimetric comparison of irregular surface compensator and field-in-field for whole breast radiotherapy

Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka Saiseikai Nakatsu Hospital, Osaka, Japan

Correspondence Address:
Ms. Nao Kuwahata
Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka Saiseikai Nakatsu Hospital, 2-10-39, Shibata, Kita-Ku, Osaka 530-0012
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/jmp.JMP_73_17

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the dosimetric benefits of the irregular surface compensator (ISC) technique for whole breast radiotherapy compared with the field-in-field (FIF) technique. Materials and Methods: Radiotherapy was planned using both techniques in 50 breast cancer patients (25 left sided and 25 right sided). The Eclipse treatment planning system (Varian Medical Systems) was used for dose calculations. For the FIF technique, subfields were added to the main fields to reduce hot and cold regions; for the ISC technique, the fluence editor application was used to extend the optimal fluence. Planning target volume dose, dose homogeneity index (DHI), maximum dose, ipsilateral lung, and heart doses for the left breast irradiation and monitor unit (MU) counts required for treatment were compared between the two techniques. Results: Compared with the FIF technique, the ISC technique significantly decreased DHI values and volumes receiving >105% of the prescription dose, and increased volumes receiving >95% of the dose and MU count (P < 0.01 for all comparisons). For the heart and ipsilateral lung, the FIF technique significantly reduced volumes receiving >5 Gy compared with the ISC technique (P < 0.01); however, volumes receiving >10, 20, and 30 Gy and the values of a mean dose did not differ significantly between the techniques (P > 0.05). Conclusions: The ISC technique is preferred over the FIF technique.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded191    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal