Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology · 2025
In vivo dosimetry in head and neck cancer radiotherapy patients using an intraoral stent: prospective cohort.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Alves Lísia Daltro Borges, Menezes Ana Carolina Dos Santos, Marin Alfredo Viamonte, Viegas Claudio Castelo Branco, Melo Andreia Cristina de, Carvalho Juliana Chaves Carneiro, Santos Marco Túlio Cunha, Alvarenga Bruna Lamis, Ribeiro Caio Weber Mendanha, Dabdab Yara Dos Santos, Silveira Thiago Bernardino da, Small Isabele Ávila, Cohen-Goldemberg Daniel, Antunes Héliton Spíndola
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the radiation dose in the oral cavity structures (through in vivo dosimetry and treatment planning system) of head and neck cancer patients; and secondarily, evaluate sialometry and oral mucositis.
STUDY DESIGN: This is a prospective cohort study with patients over 18 years old, diagnosed with oral cavity and major salivary glands cancer, treated with radiotherapy. Group A patients used an intraoral stent (n = 14), and those in Group B (n = 14) did not. In Group A, in vivo dosimetry was performed by positioning 2 thermoluminescent dosimeters in the intraoral stent; unstimulated and stimulated salivary flow were measured; and oral mucositis was evaluated.
RESULTS: In vivo dosimetry demonstrated higher doses in the tumoral area in comparison with the opposite tumor area (p < .001). The planning system predicted doses in nontumor area were lower in Group A. Unstimulated sialometry was higher in Group A in the intermediate and final sessions (p < .05), and hyposalivation was more frequent in Group B (p = .015). No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups regarding the maximum grade and duration of oral mucositis (p = .499; and p = .466, respectively).
CONCLUSION: The intraoral stent was associated with opposite tumor area lower doses, measured using in vivo dosimetry, the first time this method was applied in studies on this device. Individuals treated with the intraoral stent presented higher salivary flows during and after radiotherapy.
STUDY DESIGN: This is a prospective cohort study with patients over 18 years old, diagnosed with oral cavity and major salivary glands cancer, treated with radiotherapy. Group A patients used an intraoral stent (n = 14), and those in Group B (n = 14) did not. In Group A, in vivo dosimetry was performed by positioning 2 thermoluminescent dosimeters in the intraoral stent; unstimulated and stimulated salivary flow were measured; and oral mucositis was evaluated.
RESULTS: In vivo dosimetry demonstrated higher doses in the tumoral area in comparison with the opposite tumor area (p < .001). The planning system predicted doses in nontumor area were lower in Group A. Unstimulated sialometry was higher in Group A in the intermediate and final sessions (p < .05), and hyposalivation was more frequent in Group B (p = .015). No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups regarding the maximum grade and duration of oral mucositis (p = .499; and p = .466, respectively).
CONCLUSION: The intraoral stent was associated with opposite tumor area lower doses, measured using in vivo dosimetry, the first time this method was applied in studies on this device. Individuals treated with the intraoral stent presented higher salivary flows during and after radiotherapy.