자궁경부암 강내조사 시 CT를 이용한 CTV에 근거한 치료계획과 ICRU 38에 근거할 치료계획의 비교 (Comparison of CT based-CTV plan and CT based-ICRU38 plan in brachytherapy planning of uterine cervix cancer)
-
- 대한방사선치료학회지
- /
- 제16권2호
- /
- pp.9-17
- /
- 2004
목적 : 최근 CT, MRI 등 영상진단기술 및 방사선치료계획 소프트웨어 등이 획기적으로 발전하였음에도 불구하고 자궁경부암의 강내조사는 아직까지 A 점 등 ICRU 38에 근거한 치료계획을 보편적으로 사용하고 있다. CT를 이용한 3차원 강내조사 계획은 종양 및 정상조직에 대한 선량뿐 아니라 선량-용적 히스토그람(DVH)에 대한 정보를 제공한다. 본 연구에서는 CT를 이용하여 CTV에 목표선량을 조사하는 치료계획(CTV계획)과 ICRU 38에 근거한 치료계획(ICRU계획)을 시행하여 이 두 치료계획간에 종양선량, 직장선량, 방광선량 등을 비교하고 각각에 대한 DVH를 분석하였다. 대상 및 방법 : Ir-192 고선량율강내치료(HDR)를 시행 받은 11명의 환자를 대상으로 하였다. 강내조사계획은 외부방사선치료를 약 40Gy 시행한 후 수립되었으며 모든 환자에서 CT 모의치료기를 이용한 CT가 시행되었고 치료계획은 PLATO(Nucletron) v.14.2를 이용하였다. CT 영상에 CTV, 직장, 방광 등을 도시한 후 CTV에
목 적: 본 연구에서는 가임기 여성의 유방암 방사선 치료 시 난소 선량에 대해 실험을 통하여 평가해보고자 한다. 치료기법에 따른 치료계획시스템에서 계산된 선량과 열형광선량계를 이용한 측정선량을 비교·분석하여 난소 선량을 평가하고 납(Pb) 앞치마의 사용유무에 따른 선량 분석을 통해 임상에서의 유용성을 알아보고자 한다. 대상 및 방법: 측정에는 Rando humanoid phantom을 이용하였고, 치료기법으로는 쐐기필터치료기법, 3차원 입체조형치료, 세기변조방사선치료를 사용하였다. CT simulator를 이용하여 얻은 Rando humanoid phantom 3D 영상의 우측 유방에 처방선량의 95%가 전달될 수 있도록 치료계획을 세웠고, TLD를 Rando hunmanoid phantom의 가상 표적의 표면 및 심부에 삽입하고 방사선을 조사하였다. 측정위치는 치료 중심점과 Rando humanoid phantom의 정중앙을 중심으로 반대쪽 유방으로 2cm 이동한 지점과 치료 중심축 및 하방으로 우측 유방의 경계면에서 5cm, 10cm, 12.5cm, 15cm, 17.5cm, 20cm, 우측 난소 위치의 표면과 중심점을 포함하여 총 9개 지점에서 측정하였다. 치료계획시스템의 선량 비교에서는 쐐기필터치료기법 2가지와 3차원 입체조형치료, 세기변조방사선치료 등 총 4개의 치료 계획을 수립하여 비교하였다. 그리고 TLD를 이용한 측정값 비교는 세기변조방사선치료와 쐐기필터를 이용한 치료를 비교하였고, 납 앞치마의 사용유무에 따라서 세기변조방사선치료의 선량차이를 측정하여 비교·분석하였다. 측정값은 각 포인트마다 3개의 TLD값 평균을 내고 TLD 교정값을 이용하여 환산하였으며 이를 Point dose mean값으로 계산하였다. 치료계획값과 실제 측정값을 비교하기 위해 각 지점마다 절대선량값을 측정하여 %Diff 값으로 계산하였다. 결 과: 치료 중심점인 Point A에서는 치료계획시스템에서 최대 201.7cGy가 나왔고, 실제 TLD 측정값은 최대 200.6cGy가 나왔다. 모든 치료계획시스템에서 유방 경계면으로부터 하방으로 17.5cm 떨어진 지점인 Point G 부터는 0cGy로 계산이 되었다. 실제 TLD 측정 결과 Point G에서는 최대 2.6cGy가 나왔고, 난소선량인 Point J에서는 최대 0.9cGy로 나타났으며 %Diff값은 0.3%~1.3%였다. 납 앞치마의 사용유무에 따른 선량 차이는 최대 2.1cGy에서 최소 0.1cGy로 나타났으며 %Diff값은 0.1%~1.1%였다. 결 론: 치료계획시스템에서 3가지 치료계획에 따른 선량차이는 최저 0.85%에서 최고 2.45%로 큰 격차를 보이지 않았다. 난소에서 Rando humanoid phantom의 치료계획과 실제 측정한 선량차이는 0.9% 이내로 나타났으나 실제 측정에서 조금 더 높게 측정되었다. 이는 치료계획시스템에서 산란선의 영향을 정확하게 반영하지 못하였고, 실제 측정에서는 TLD를 삽입한 상태로 CBCT를 촬영한 선량과 산란선량이 반영된 것으로 사료된다. 납 앞치마의 유무에 따른 선량측정에서 납 앞치마를 사용했을 경우에 치료범위에서 가까운 거리일수록 차폐의 효과가 있었으며, 치료범위에서 15cm 이상 거리가 있는 경우에는 거의 영향을 미치지 않는 것으로 나타났다. 임상적으로 방사선 치료 중에는 임신이나 인공수정을 하기에는 적절하지 않지만, 치료 중 난소에 조사된 선량은 방사선 치료 후 가임기 여성의 생식 기능에 크게 영향을 주지 않을 것으로 생각된다. 하지만 가임 여성의 경우에는 지속적인 불안감을 가지고 있으므로 이번 결과를 통한 데이터를 제시함으로써 심리적인 안정을 도모할 수 있을 것으로 사료된다.
Just before the Korean War, the total number of the North Korean troops was 198,380, while that of the ROK(Republic of Korea) army troops 105,752. That is, the total number of the ROK army troops at that time was 53.3% of the total number of the North Korean army. As of December 2008, the total number of the North Korean troops is estimated to be 1,190,000, while that of the ROK troops is 655,000, so the ROK army maintains 55.04% of the total number of the North Korean troops. If the ROK army continues to reduce its troops according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the total number of its troops will be 517,000 m 2020. If North Korea maintains the current status(l,190,000 troops), the number of the ROK troops will be 43.4% of the North Korean army. In terms of units, just before the Korean War, the number of the ROK army divisions and regiments was 80% and 44.8% of North Korean army. As of December 2008, North Korea maintains 86 divisions and 69 regiments. Compared to the North Korean army, the ROK army maintains 46 Divisions (53.4% of North Korean army) and 15 regiments (21.3% of North Korean army). If the ROK army continue to reduce the military units according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of ROK army divisions will be 28(13 Active Division, 4 Mobilization Divisions and 11 Local Reserve Divisions), while that of the North Korean army will be 86 in 2020. In that case, the number of divisions of the ROK army will be 32.5% of North Korean army. During the Korean war, North Korea suddenly invaded the Republic of Korea and occupied its capital 3 days after the war began. At that time, the ROK army maintained 80% of army divisions, compared to the North Korean army. The lesson to be learned from this is that, if the ROK army is forced to disperse its divisions because of the simultaneous invasion of North Korea and attack of guerrillas in home front areas, the Republic of Korea can be in a serious military danger, even though it maintains 80% of military divisions of North Korea. If the ROK army promotes the plans in [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of military units of the ROK army will be 32.5% of that of the North Korean army. This ratio is 2.4 times lower than that of the time when the Korean war began, and in this case, 90% of total military power should be placed in the DMZ area. If 90% of military power is placed in the DMZ area, few troops will be left for the defense of home front. In addition, if the ROK army continues to reduce the troops, it can allow North Korea to have asymmetrical superiority in military force and it will eventually exert negative influence on the stability and peace of the Korean peninsular. On the other hand, it should be reminded that, during the Korean War, the Republic of Korea was attacked by North Korea, though it kept 53.3% of troops, compared to North Korea. It should also be reminded that, as of 2008, the ROK army is defending its territory with the troops 55.04% of North Korea. Moreover, the national defense is assisted by 25,120 troops of the US Forces in Korea. In case the total number of the ROK troops falls below 43.4% of the North Korean army, it may cause social unrest about the national security and may lead North Korea's misjudgement. Besides, according to Lanchester strategy, the party with weaker military power (60% compared to the party with stronger military power) has the 4.1% of winning possibility. Therefore, if we consider the fact that the total number of the ROK army troops is 55.04% of that of the North Korean army, the winning possibility of the ROK army is not higher than 4.1%. If the total number of ROK troops is reduced to 43.4% of that of North Korea, the winning possibility will be lower and the military operations will be in critically difficult situation. [Military Reform Plan 2020] rums at the reduction of troops and units of the ground forces under the policy of 'select few'. However, the problem is that the financial support to achieve this goal is not secured. Therefore, the promotion of [Military Reform Plan 2020] may cause the weakening of military defence power in 2020. Some advanced countries such as Japan, UK, Germany, and France have promoted the policy of 'select few'. However, what is to be noted is that the national security situation of those countries is much different from that of Korea. With the collapse of the Soviet Unions and European communist countries, the military threat of those European advanced countries has almost disappeared. In addition, the threats those advanced countries are facing are not wars in national level, but terrorism in international level. To cope with the threats like terrorism, large scaled army trops would not be necessary. So those advanced European countries can promote the policy of 'select few'. In line with this, those European countries put their focuses on the development of military sections that deal with non-military operations and protection from unspecified enemies. That is, those countries are promoting the policy of 'select few', because they found that the policy is suitable for their national security environment. Moreover, since they are pursuing common interest under the European Union(EU) and they can form an allied force under NATO, it is natural that they are pursing the 'select few' policy. At present, NATO maintains the larger number of troops(2,446,000) than Russia(l,027,000) to prepare for the potential threat of Russia. The situation of japan is also much different from that of Korea. As a country composed of islands, its prime military focus is put on the maritime defense. Accordingly, the development of ground force is given secondary focus. The japanese government promotes the policy to develop technology-concentrated small size navy and air-forces, instead of maintaining large-scaled ground force. In addition, because of the 'Peace Constitution' that was enacted just after the end of World War II, japan cannot maintain troops more than 240,000. With the limited number of troops (240,000), japan has no choice but to promote the policy of 'select few'. However, the situation of Korea is much different from the situations of those countries. The Republic of Korea is facing the threat of the North Korean Army that aims at keeping a large-scale military force. In addition, the countries surrounding Korea are also super powers containing strong military forces. Therefore, to cope with the actual threat of present and unspecified threat of future, the importance of maintaining a carefully calculated large-scale military force cannot be denied. Furthermore, when considering the fact that Korea is in a peninsular, the Republic of Korea must take it into consideration the tradition of continental countries' to maintain large-scale military powers. Since the Korean War, the ROK army has developed the technology-force combined military system, maintaining proper number of troops and units and pursuing 'select few' policy at the same time. This has been promoted with the consideration of military situation in the Koran peninsular and the cooperation of ROK-US combined forces. This kind of unique military system that cannot be found in other countries can be said to be an insightful one for the preparation for the actual threat of North Korea and the conflicts between continental countries and maritime countries. In addition, this kind of technology-force combined military system has enabled us to keep peace in Korea. Therefore, it would be desirable to maintain this technology-force combined military system until the reunification of the Korean peninsular. Furthermore, it is to be pointed out that blindly following the 'select few' policy of advanced countries is not a good option, because it is ignoring the military strategic situation of the Korean peninsular. If the Republic of Korea pursues the reduction of troops and units radically without consideration of the threat of North Korea and surrounding countries, it could be a significant strategic mistake. In addition, the ROK army should keep an eye on the fact the European advanced countries and Japan that are not facing direct military threats are spending more defense expenditures than Korea. If the ROK army reduces military power without proper alternatives, it would exert a negative effect on the stable economic development of Korea and peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsular. Therefore, the desirable option would be to focus on the development of quality of forces, maintaining proper size and number of troops and units under the technology-force combined military system. The tableau above shows that the advanced countries like the UK, Germany, Italy, and Austria spend more defense expenditure per person than the Republic of Korea, although they do not face actual military threats, and that they keep achieving better economic progress than the countries that spend less defense expenditure. Therefore, it would be necessary to adopt the merits of the defense systems of those advanced countries. As we have examined, it would be desirable to maintain the current size and number of troops and units, to promote 'select few' policy with increased defense expenditure, and to strengthen the technology-force combined military system. On the basis of firm national security, the Republic of Korea can develop efficient policies for reunification and prosperity, and jump into the status of advanced countries. Therefore, the plans to reduce troops and units in [Military Reform Plan 2020] should be reexamined. If it is difficult for the ROK army to maintain its size of 655,000 troops because of low birth rate, the plans to establish the prompt mobilization force or to adopt drafting system should be considered for the maintenance of proper number of troops and units. From now on, the Republic of Korean government should develop plans to keep peace as well as to prepare unexpected changes in the Korean peninsular. For the achievement of these missions, some options can be considered. The first one is to maintain the same size of military troops and units as North Korea. The second one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea in terms of military force index. The third one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea, with the combination of the prompt mobilization force and the troops in active service under the system of technology-force combined military system. At present, it would be not possible for the ROK army to maintain such a large-size military force as North Korea (1,190,000 troops and 86 units). So it would be rational to maintain almost the same level of military force as North Korea with the combination of the troops on the active list and the prompt mobilization forces. In other words, with the combination of the troops in active service (60%) and the prompt mobilization force (40%), the ROK army should develop the strategies to harmonize technology and forces. The Korean government should also be prepared for the strategic flexibility of USFK, the possibility of American policy change about the location of foreign army, radical unexpected changes in North Korea, the emergence of potential threat, surrounding countries' demand for Korean force for the maintenance of regional stability, and demand for international cooperation against terrorism. For this, it is necessary to develop new approaches toward the proper number and size of troops and units. For instance, to prepare for radical unexpected political or military changes in North Korea, the Republic of Korea should have plans to protect a large number of refugees, to control arms and people, to maintain social security, and to keep orders in North Korea. From the experiences of other countries, it is estimated that 115,000 to 230,000 troops, plus ten thousands of police are required to stabilize the North Korean society, in the case radical unexpected military or political change happens in North Korea. In addition, if the Republic of Korea should perform the release of hostages, control of mass destruction weapons, and suppress the internal wars in North Korea, it should send 460,000 troops to North Korea. Moreover, if the Republic of Korea wants to stop the attack of North Korea and flow of refugees in DMZ area, at least 600,000 troops would be required. In sum, even if the ROK army maintains 600,000 troops, it may need additional 460,000 troops to prepare for unexpected radical changes in North Korea. For this, it is necessary to establish the prompt mobilization force whose size and number are almost the same as the troops in active service. In case the ROK army keeps 650,000 troops, the proper number of the prompt mobilization force would be 460,000 to 500,000.
세계경제 및 환경의 변화에 따라 농산물의 불안정적인 수급으로 인한 문제점이 노출되고 있으며, 우리나라의 경우 농산물의 안정적인 확보를 위하여 국가 전략적 차원에서의 해외농업투자의 필요성이 요구되고 있다. 하지만 정부차원의 지원 미진, 해외 농업에 대한 정보 및 기술 미비, 개발자금 확보의 어려움, 장기간의 투자금 회수기간, 사후관리 미흡 등의 이유로 성과를 이루지 못하고 있는 실정이며, 특히 해외 농산물의 국내 반입 시 관세의 장벽, 물류 유통비용 등으로 가격 경쟁력이 떨어지고 있어 국내에 반입되지 못하고 있는 실정이다. 이에 본 연구에서는 우리나라의 해외농업투자의 기본개념 및 실태를 살펴보고 해외농업투자의 필요성과 고려사항, 문제점 등을 도출하여 해외에서 재배된 농산물의 경쟁력을 위한 유통 측면에서의 개선방안을 정부의 간접적인 지원, 유통 현대화 및 유통정보기능 강화, 유통시설, 수송루트, 하역업무개선, 경쟁력 확보를 위한 정부의 정책적 지원, 교육 훈련을 통한 전문인력 양성 등 다섯 가지 측면에서 제시하였다.