Skip to main content
. 2018 Jan 19;19(2):83–92. doi: 10.1002/acm2.12247

Table 3.

The differences of D2 cc values between the reference dataset and either original DVH parameter addition or a revised addition method when two different EBRT techniques, 3DCRT and IMRT were compared. EBRT cases with PA or PM boosts were excluded for this analysis. No statistically significant differences were recorded (p > 0.3148)

Organ 3DCRT [% (GyEQD2)]a IMRT [% (GyEQD2)]a Difference Between 3DCRT and IMRT [% (GyEQD2)]b
∆D2ccEQD2 Mean ∆D2ccEQD2 Std Dev ∆D2ccEQD2 Mean ∆D2ccEQD2 Std Dev ∆D2ccEQD2 Mean P‐value
Current DVH parameter addition with Uniform EBRT Rx Dose Assumption
Conformal HDR Plan
Rectum −3.8 (−2.3) 1.8 (1.2) −3.9 (−1.9) 8.4 (5.3) 0.1 (−0.4) 0.9053
Bladder −5.0 (−3.7) 9.2 (6.3) −6.2 (−4.8) 2.9 (2.3) 1.2 (1.1) 0.6913
Sigmoid −8.2 (−4.7) 5.4 (2.8) −7.1 (−4.5) 2.5 (1.5) −1.1 (−0.2) 0.4407
Point A HDR Plan
Rectum −2.1 (−1.4) 3.1 (2.2) −3.6 (−2.3) 6.7 (4.6) 1.5 (0.9) 0.8845
Bladder −3.9 (−3.1) 5.4 (4.9) −1.8 (−1.0) 7.6 (7.7) −2.1 (−2.1) 0.7509
Sigmoid −7.3 (−4.7) 5.9 (2.7) −4.9 (−3.5) 6.8 (5.0) −2.4 (−1.2) 0.8157
Revised DVH parameter addition
Conformal HDR Plan
Rectum −3.4 (−2.0) 8.6 (4.9) −1.9 (−1.1) 1.2 (0.7) −1.5 (−0.9) 0.9949
Bladder −2.2 (−1.9) 10.0 (7.6) −2.7 (−2.1) 1.6 (1.4) 0.5 (0.3) 0.5071
Sigmoid −5.7 (−3.2) 9.4 (4.5) −2.6 (−1.8) 1.8 (1.3) −3.1 (−1.4) 0.3149
Point A HDR Plan
Rectum +1.6 (+1.4) 4.6 (3.5) −1.3 (−0.8) 1.4 (1.0) 2.9 (2.2) 0.7352
Bladder +0.5 (+0.6) 5.0 (5.0) +1.2 (+1.8) 7.2 (7.8) −0.8 (−1.2) 0.8419
Sigmoid −0.4 (−0.4) 3.2 (2.4) −0.7 (−0.5) 6.7 (5.5) 0.3 (0.1) 0.9156
a

Negative sign refers the values of current/revised DVH parameter addition underestimate when compared to the reference datasets.

b

The values = 3DCRT – IMRT. Thus, negative signs refers IMRT values are bigger than 3DCRT values.