الفهرس 
TITLE PAGEOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 83 |  |  |
| | | from | 83 | | |
Abstract
Treatment for lung cancer still faces significant challenges with tumor mobility management. It is challenging to assess the actual influence of new technologies on the therapeutic window since there is a dearth of information comparing the outcomes of patients treated with different motion management systems. The best method for a given clinical presentation and patient population must be determined through clinical studies. Increased accessibility to technological solutions is anticipated.( Shirato H et al, 2004)
It is commonly recognized that a significant source of positional, or geometric, ambiguity in thoracic illness locations is respiration-induced anatomic mobility. Obtaining information on the degree of tumor motion-which is crucial for determining the right margins for radiotherapy—with regular fluoroscopy is frequently challenging. Computed tomography artifacts may also result from respiration-induced motion. While respiratory motion appears to have no effect on any single slice, inaccuracies in the apparent shape and volume of anatomic objects result from successive slices occurring at different periods of the respiration cycle.( Shirato H et al, 2004)
The current study examined forty-two lung cancer patients receiving treatment at Alexandria’s Specialized Universal Network of Oncology to determine the target’s range of motion during the respiratory phases, which could aid in determining the margin around the tumor, particularly in patients who are unable to breathe freely or completely.
Within the population of 42 instances, the maximum amplitudes in x, y and z were 1.15 ± 0.46, 1.22 ± 0.55, and 1.17 ± 0.45, respectively. Based on the internal target volume and lung volume, a significant difference (p<0.001) was found between the examined cases that were non-breath-hold (NBH) and breath-hold (BH). There was no significant relation between site of tumor and max amplitude in x, y and z.