Öz
Kaynakça
- 1. Al-Ansari S, Zecha JA, Barasch A, de Lange J, Rozema FR, RaberDurlacher JE. Oral Mucositis Induced By Anticancer Therapies. Curr Oral Health Rep 2015; 2: 202-11.
- 2. Elting LS, Cooksley CD, Chambers MS, Garden AS. Risk, outcomes, and costs of radiation-induced oral mucositis among patients with head-and-neck malignancies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 68: 1110-20.
- 3. Sonis ST. Mucositis: The impact, biology and therapeutic opportunities of oral mucositis. Oral Oncol 2009; 45: 1015-20.
- 4. Farahani M, Eichmiller FC, McLaughlin WL. Measurement of absorbed doses near metal and dental material interfaces irradiated by x- and gamma-ray therapy beams. Phys Med Biol. 1990; 35: 369- 85.
- 5. Trotti A, Bellm LA, Epstein JB, Frame D, Fuchs HJ, Gwede CK, et al. Mucositis incidence, severity and associated outcomes in patients with head and neck cancer receiving radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy: a systematic literature review. Radiother Oncol 2003; 66: 253-62.
- 6. Verrone JR, Alves FA, Prado JD, Marcicano Ad, de Assis Pellizzon AC, Damascena AS, et al. Benefits of an intraoral stent in decreasing the irradiation dose to oral healthy tissue: dosimetric and clinical features. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2014; 118: 573- 8.
- 7. Bodard AG, Racadot S, Salino S, Pommier P, Zrounba P, Montbarbon X. A new, simple maxillary-sparing tongue depressor for external mandibular radiotherapy: a case report. Head Neck 2009; 31: 1528-30.
- 8. Kawamura M, Maeda Y, Takamatsu S, Tameshige Y, Sasaki M, Asahi S, et al. The usefulness of vinyl polysiloxane dental impression material as a proton beam stopper to save normal tissue duringirradiation of the oral cavity: basic and clinical verifications. MedPhys 2013; 40: 081707.
- 9. Inoue Y, Yamagata K, Nakamura M, Ohnishi K, Tabuchi K, BukawaH. Are Intraoral Stents Effective for Reducing the Severity of Oral Mucositis During Radiotherapy for Maxillary and Nasal CavityCancer? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020; 78: 1214.e1-8.
- 10. Wang RR, Olmsted LW. A direct method for fabricating tongueshielding stent. J Prosthet Dent 1995; 74: 171-3.
- 11. Aygün B. Improving Neutron and Gamma Radiation ShieldingProperties of Polysiloxane /Cr2O3 -Fe2O3 Added CompositeMaterial. J Sci Eng Res 2019; 10: 18-25.
- 12. https://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/Xcom/html/xcom1.html
- 13. Özpolat ÖF, Alım B, Şakar E, Büyükyıldız M, Kurudirek M. Phy-X/ZeXTRa: a software for robust calculation of effective atomicnumbers for photon, electron, proton, alpha particle, and carbonioninteractions. Radiat Environ Biophys 2020; 59: 321-9.
- 14. Madrid CC, de Pauli Paglioni M, Line SR, Vasconcelos KG, BrandãoTB, Lopes MA, et al. Structural Analysis of Enamel in TeethfromHead-and-Neck Cancer Patients Who Underwent Radiotherapy. Caries Res 2017; 51: 119-28.
- 15. Manohara SR, Hanagodimath SM, Gerward L. Energy dependenceof effective atomic numbers for photon energy absorptionandphoton interaction: studies of some biological molecules intheenergy range 1 keV-20 MeV. Med Phys 2008; 35: 388-402.
- 16. Hubbell JH. Review of photon interaction cross section data inthemedical and biological context. Phys Med Biol 1999; 44: R1-22
- 17. Hubbell JH. Photon mass attenuation and energy-absorptioncoefficients. Int J Appl Radiat Isot 1982; 33: 1269-90.
- 18. Saadatmand P, Amouheidari A, Shanei A, Abedi I. Dose perturbationdue to dental amalgam in the head and neck radiotherapy: Aphantom study. Med Dosim 2020; 45: 128-33.
- 19. Ikawa H, Koto M, Ebner DK, Takagi R, Hayashi K, Tsuji H, ETAL. A custom-made mouthpiece incorporating tongue depressorsandelevators to reduce radiation-induced tongue muc
Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Polyether Silicone-based and Polyvinyl Siloxane Dental Impression Materials for Shielding ScatteredRadiation During Radiotherapy
Öz
Objective: Radiation-induced oral mucositis is a major problem associated with radiotherapy. This study aimed to investigatetheeffectiveness of polyether silicone-based (PE) and polyvinyl siloxane (PVS) impression materials in protecting adjacent tissuesfrom radiation scattered from dental materials.
Materials and Methods: Amalgam, zirconium, and titanium dental material specimens were covered with 5 mm PE and PVSinthestudy group. The dental materials were placed in a linear accelerator device at a distance of 100 cm from the radiation sourceandcoincided with a field size of 15x15 mm. Samples placed perpendicular to the central beam were irradiated with 6 MV photonsat a fractional daily therapeutic radiation dose of 2 Gy. Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD-100) placed 90 degrees lateral tothespecimens were used to record the scattered dose data. In the control group, uncovered dental materials were irradiated, andscattered doses were measured by TLD. The TLD data of the study and control groups were compared by independent t-test toanalyze the shielding effect of PE and PVS. In addition, the photon stopper properties of PE and PVS were compared. The photoninteraction parameters and effective atomic numbers of dental materials were calculated.
Results: It was calculated that the PE and PVS significantly prevent the dose enhancement caused by dental materials (p<0.05). There was no difference between impression materials in the photon-stopping properties (p>0.05).
Conclusion: PE and PVS can be used as scatter dose shields for the 2 Gy daily fractional dose. This study demonstratestheradiation-shielding properties of PE for the first time.
Anahtar Kelimeler
Amalgam dental materials dental impression materials X-rays zirconium
Kaynakça
- 1. Al-Ansari S, Zecha JA, Barasch A, de Lange J, Rozema FR, RaberDurlacher JE. Oral Mucositis Induced By Anticancer Therapies. Curr Oral Health Rep 2015; 2: 202-11.
- 2. Elting LS, Cooksley CD, Chambers MS, Garden AS. Risk, outcomes, and costs of radiation-induced oral mucositis among patients with head-and-neck malignancies. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 68: 1110-20.
- 3. Sonis ST. Mucositis: The impact, biology and therapeutic opportunities of oral mucositis. Oral Oncol 2009; 45: 1015-20.
- 4. Farahani M, Eichmiller FC, McLaughlin WL. Measurement of absorbed doses near metal and dental material interfaces irradiated by x- and gamma-ray therapy beams. Phys Med Biol. 1990; 35: 369- 85.
- 5. Trotti A, Bellm LA, Epstein JB, Frame D, Fuchs HJ, Gwede CK, et al. Mucositis incidence, severity and associated outcomes in patients with head and neck cancer receiving radiotherapy with or without chemotherapy: a systematic literature review. Radiother Oncol 2003; 66: 253-62.
- 6. Verrone JR, Alves FA, Prado JD, Marcicano Ad, de Assis Pellizzon AC, Damascena AS, et al. Benefits of an intraoral stent in decreasing the irradiation dose to oral healthy tissue: dosimetric and clinical features. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol 2014; 118: 573- 8.
- 7. Bodard AG, Racadot S, Salino S, Pommier P, Zrounba P, Montbarbon X. A new, simple maxillary-sparing tongue depressor for external mandibular radiotherapy: a case report. Head Neck 2009; 31: 1528-30.
- 8. Kawamura M, Maeda Y, Takamatsu S, Tameshige Y, Sasaki M, Asahi S, et al. The usefulness of vinyl polysiloxane dental impression material as a proton beam stopper to save normal tissue duringirradiation of the oral cavity: basic and clinical verifications. MedPhys 2013; 40: 081707.
- 9. Inoue Y, Yamagata K, Nakamura M, Ohnishi K, Tabuchi K, BukawaH. Are Intraoral Stents Effective for Reducing the Severity of Oral Mucositis During Radiotherapy for Maxillary and Nasal CavityCancer? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020; 78: 1214.e1-8.
- 10. Wang RR, Olmsted LW. A direct method for fabricating tongueshielding stent. J Prosthet Dent 1995; 74: 171-3.
- 11. Aygün B. Improving Neutron and Gamma Radiation ShieldingProperties of Polysiloxane /Cr2O3 -Fe2O3 Added CompositeMaterial. J Sci Eng Res 2019; 10: 18-25.
- 12. https://physics.nist.gov/PhysRefData/Xcom/html/xcom1.html
- 13. Özpolat ÖF, Alım B, Şakar E, Büyükyıldız M, Kurudirek M. Phy-X/ZeXTRa: a software for robust calculation of effective atomicnumbers for photon, electron, proton, alpha particle, and carbonioninteractions. Radiat Environ Biophys 2020; 59: 321-9.
- 14. Madrid CC, de Pauli Paglioni M, Line SR, Vasconcelos KG, BrandãoTB, Lopes MA, et al. Structural Analysis of Enamel in TeethfromHead-and-Neck Cancer Patients Who Underwent Radiotherapy. Caries Res 2017; 51: 119-28.
- 15. Manohara SR, Hanagodimath SM, Gerward L. Energy dependenceof effective atomic numbers for photon energy absorptionandphoton interaction: studies of some biological molecules intheenergy range 1 keV-20 MeV. Med Phys 2008; 35: 388-402.
- 16. Hubbell JH. Review of photon interaction cross section data inthemedical and biological context. Phys Med Biol 1999; 44: R1-22
- 17. Hubbell JH. Photon mass attenuation and energy-absorptioncoefficients. Int J Appl Radiat Isot 1982; 33: 1269-90.
- 18. Saadatmand P, Amouheidari A, Shanei A, Abedi I. Dose perturbationdue to dental amalgam in the head and neck radiotherapy: Aphantom study. Med Dosim 2020; 45: 128-33.
- 19. Ikawa H, Koto M, Ebner DK, Takagi R, Hayashi K, Tsuji H, ETAL. A custom-made mouthpiece incorporating tongue depressorsandelevators to reduce radiation-induced tongue muc
Ayrıntılar
| Birincil Dil | İngilizce |
|---|---|
| Konular | Diş Hekimliği (Diğer) |
| Bölüm | Araştırma Makalesi |
| Yazarlar | |
| Yayımlanma Tarihi | 30 Aralık 2023 |
| Yayımlandığı Sayı | Yıl 2023 Cilt: 24 Sayı: 4 |