Fig. 2
From: IMRT delivers lower radiation doses to dental structures than 3DRT in head and neck cancer patients
Mean of the maximum and of the average dental doses delivered by 3DRT and IMRT according to the location of the primary tumor treated. a There was no significant difference in the radiation doses (maximum and average) delivered by 3DRT to all HNC treated. Legend: There was no statistically significant difference according to One-way ANOVA test. Mean of the maximum doses: Oral cavity 49.02 Gy (±27.69 Gy), tongue 41.64 Gy (±25.34 Gy), nasopharynx 46.83 Gy (±16.51 Gy) and oropharynx 44.14 Gy (±28.06 Gy). Mean of the average doses: Oral cavity 43.39 Gy (±26.47 Gy), tongue 36.08 Gy (±25.51 Gy), nasopharynx 37.27 Gy (±17.14 Gy) and oropharynx 37.76 Gy (±27.69 Gy). b On the other hand, IMRT delivered significantly higher dental doses to patients treated for oral cavity if compared to oropharynx (maximum dose) cancer and to tongue if compared to all other cancers (average dose). Legend: * Statistically significant difference according to One-way ANOVA test. Different letters represent statistically different groups according to Tukey’s Post Hoc test. Mean of the maximum doses: Oral cavity 42.47 Gy (±18.07 Gy), tongue 48.36 Gy (±19.11 Gy), nasopharynx 42.06 Gy (±12.94 Gy) and oropharynx 39.67 Gy (±19.60 Gy). Mean of the average doses: Oral cavity 33.40 Gy (±16.37 Gy), tongue 39.41 Gy (±17.89 Gy), nasopharynx 31.68 Gy (±9.23 Gy) and oropharynx 31.95 Gy (±16.81 Gy). c Comparing both techniques we observed that 3DRT delivered significantly higher dental doses to patients treated for nasopharynx (maximum and average doses) and oral cavity (average dose) cancers than IMRT. Legend: * Statistically significant difference according to t-test