• Journal of Radiation Protection and Research
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.139-147
• /
• 1998

Purpose: Tissue inhomogeneity such as lung affects tumor dose as well as transmission dose in new concept of on-line dosimetry which estimates tumor dose from transmission dose using the new algorithm. This study was carried out to confirm accuracy of correction by tissue density in tumor dose estimation utilizing transmission dose. Methods: Cork phantom (CP, density $0.202\;gm/cm^3$) having similar density with lung parenchyme and polystyrene phantom (PP, density $1.040\;gm/cm^3$) having similar density with soft tissue were used. Dose measurement was carried out under condition simulating human chest. On simulating AP-PA irradiation, PPs with 3 cm thickness were placed above and below CP, which had thickness of 5, 10, and 20 cm. On simulating lateral irradiation, 6 cm thickness of PP was placed between two 10 cm thickness CPs additional 3 cm thick PP was placed to both lateral sides. 4, 6, and 10 MV x-ray were used. Field size was in the range of $3{\times}3$ cm through $20{\times}20$ cm, and phantom-chamber distance (PCD) was 10 to 50 cm. Above result was compared with another sets of data with equivalent thickness of PP which was corrected by density. Result: When transmission dose of PP was compared with equivalent thickness of CP which was corrected with density, the average error was 0.18 (${\pm}0.27$) % for 4 MV, 0.10 (${\pm}0.43$) % for 6 MV, and 0.33 (${\pm}0.30$) % for 10 MV with CP having thickness of 5 cm. When CP was 10 cm thick, the error was 0.23 (${\pm}0.73$) %, 0.05 (${\pm}0.57$) %, and 0.04 (${\pm}0.40$) %, while for 20 cm, error was 0.55 (${\pm}0.36$) %, 0.34 (${\pm}0.27$) %, and 0.34 (${\pm}0.18$) % for corresponding energy. With lateral irradiation model, difference was 1.15 (${\pm}1.86$) %, 0.90 (${\pm}1.43$) %, and 0.86 (${\pm}1.01$) % for corresponding energy. Relatively large difference was found in case of PCD having value of 10 cm. Omitting PCD with 10 cm, the difference was reduced to 0.47 (${\pm}$1.17) %, 0.42 (${\pm}$0.96) %, and 0.55 (${\pm}$0.77) % for corresponding energy. Conclusion When tissue inhomogeneity such as lung is in tract of x-ray beam, tumor dose could be calculated from transmission dose after correction utilizing tissue density.

• Tuberculosis and Respiratory Diseases
• /
• v.42 no.3
• /
• pp.351-360
• /
• 1995

Background: Pressure support(PS) is becomimg a widely accepted method of mechanical ventilation either for total unloading or for partial unloading of respiratory muscle. The aim of the study was to find out if PS exert different effects on respiratory mechanics in synchronized intermittent mandatory ventilation(SIMV) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) modes. Methods: 5, 10 and 15 cm $H_2O$ of PS were sequentially applied in 14 patients($69{\pm}12$ yrs, M:F=9:5) and respiratory rate (RR), tidal volume($V_T$), work of breathing(WOB), pressure time product(PTP), $P_{0.1}$, and $T_1/T_{TOT}$ were measured using the CP-100 pulmonary monitor(Bicore, USA) in SIMV and CPAP modes respectively. Results: 1) Common effects of PS on respiratory mechanics in both CPAP and SIMV modes As the level of PS was increased(0, 5, 10, 15 cm $H_2O$), $V_T$ was increased in CPAP mode($0.28{\pm}0.09$, $0.29{\pm}0.09$, $0.31{\pm}0.11$, $0.34{\pm}0.12\;L$, respectively, p=0.001), and also in SIMV mode($0.31{\pm}0.15$, $0.32{\pm}0.09$, $0.34{\pm}0.16$, $0.36{\pm}0.15\;L$, respectively, p=0.0215). WOB was decreased in CPAP mode($1.40{\pm}1.02$, $1.01{\pm}0.80$, $0.80{\pm}0.85$, $0.68{\pm}0.76$ joule/L, respectively, p=0.0001), and in SIMV mode($0.97{\pm}0.77$, $0.76{\pm}0.64$, $0.57{\pm}0.55$, $0.49{\pm}0.49$ joule/L, respectively, p=0.0001). PTP was also decreased in CPAP mode($300{\pm}216$, $217{\pm}165$, $179{\pm}187$, $122{\pm}114cm$ $H_2O{\cdot}sec/min$, respectively, p=0.0001), and in SIMV mode($218{\pm}181$, $178{\pm}157$, $130{\pm}147$, $108{\pm}129cm$ $H_2O{\cdot}sec/min$, respectively, p=0.0017). 2) Different effects of PS on respiratory mechanics in CP AP and SIMV modes By application of PS (0, 5, 10, 15 cm $H_2O$), RR was not changed in CPAP mode($27.9{\pm}6.7$, $30.0{\pm}6.6$, $26.1{\pm}9.1$, $27.5{\pm}5.7/min$, respectively, p=0.505), but it was decreased in SIMV mode ($27.4{\pm}5.1$, $27.8{\pm}6.5$, $27.6{\pm}6.2$, $25.1{\pm}5.4/min$, respectively, p=0.0001). $P_{0.1}$ was reduced in CPAP mode($6.2{\pm}3.5$, $4.8{\pm}2.8$, $4.8{\pm}3.8$, $3.9{\pm}2.5\;cm$ $H_2O$, respectively, p=0.0061), but not in SIMV mode($4.3{\pm}2.1$, $4.0{\pm}1.8$, $3.5{\pm}1.6$, $3.5{\pm}1.9\;cm$ $H_2O$, respectively, p=0.054). $T_1/T_{TOT}$ was decreased in CPAP mode($0.40{\pm}0.05$, $0.39{\pm}0.04$, $0.37{\pm}0.04$, $0.35{\pm}0.04$, respectively, p=0.0004), but not in SIMV mode($0.40{\pm}0.08$, $0.35{\pm}0.07$, $0.38{\pm}0.10$, $0.37{\pm}0.10$, respectively, p=0.287). 3) Comparison of respiratory mechanics between CPAP+PS and SIMV alone at same tidal volume. The tidal volume in CPAP+PS 10 cm $H_2O$ was comparable to that of SIMV alone. Under this condition, the RR($26.1{\pm}9.1$, $27.4{\pm}5.1/min$, respectively, p=0.516), WOB($0.80{\pm}0.85$, 0.97+0.77 joule/L, respectively, p=0.485), $P_{0.1}$($3.9{\pm}2.5$, $4.3{\pm}2.1\;cm$ $H_2O$, respectively, p=0.481) were not different between the two methods, but PTP($179{\pm}187$, $218{\pm}181 cmH_2O{\cdot}sec/min$, respectively, p=0.042) and $T_1/T_{TOT}$($0.37{\pm}0.04$, $0.40{\pm}0.08$, respectively, p=0.026) were significantly lower in CPAP+PS than in SIMV alone. Conclusion: PS up to 15 cm $H_2O$ increased tidal volume, decreased work of breathing and pressure time product in both SIMV and CPAP modes. PS decreased respiration rate in SIMV mode but not in CPAP mode, while it reduced central respiratory drive($P_{0.1}$) and shortened duty cycle ($T_1/T_{TOT}$) in CPAP mode but not in SIMV mode. By 10 em $H_2O$ of PS in CPAP mode, same tidal volume was obtained as in SIMV mode, and both methods were comparable in respect to RR, WOB, $P_{0.1}$, but CPAP+PS was superior in respect to the efficiency of the respiratory muscle work (PTP) and duty cycle($T_1/T_{TOT}$).