Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(6)
Whole pelvis irradiation was initially given through parallel opposing 10 MV photons to a dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions.
Postoperative whole-pelvic radiotherapy was performed using 10 megavolt (MV) X-rays delivered from a linear accelerator using the antero-posterior parallel opposing technique.
Anterior posterior parallel opposing fields were used and the radiation dose was 4500 cGy, with 180 cGy daily fractions over 5 weeks.
Postoperative EFRT was also administered to the patients via 10 MV X-rays delivered from a linear accelerator using the antero-posterior parallel opposing technique.
Primary tumor site and upper neck node bearing areas were irradiated by two parallel opposing fields with half beam technique, and lower neck and supraclavicular nodes by matched anterior one field.
The four parallel opposing fields (anterior, posterior, and opposed lateral fields) were used, and the radiation dose to the adjacent organs was limited as follows: liver ⩽30 Gy, kidneys ⩽20 Gy, and spinal cord ⩽45 Gy).
Similar(54)
For 10 x 10 cm2 parallel opposed fields at 4, 6 and 8 MV, the mean dose at regions near the lateral interfaces of the cavity cube were decreased by 1 to 2% due to the lack of lateral scatter, while the mean dose near the proximal and distal interfaces was increased by 2 to 4% due to the greater transmission through air.
Each dosimeter was irradiated with the same simple treatment plan: an isocentric 3-field "cross" arrangement of 4 × 4 cm open 6 MV beams configured as parallel opposed laterals with an anterior beam.
The spinal cord dose was limited to 50 Gy using oblique parallel opposed fields.
WBI was perfomed with 6-10 MV photon beams from a linear accelerator via parallel opposed fields (90° and 270°).
The radiotherapy to the whole brain was planned by simulation and given by parallel opposed right and left lateral portals using six megavoltage X-rays beams.
More suggestions(3)
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com