Prospects for the Use of Thermoelectric Cooling Devices for the Treatment of Radiation-Induced Oropharyngeal Syndrome
https://doi.org/10.21822/2073-6185-2026-53-1-6-14
Abstract
Objective. The aim of this study is to develop a cooling thermoelectric device (CTED) for the treatment of radiation-induced oropharyngeal syndrome through local hypothermia.
Method. The study is based on thermodynamic analysis, in-kind modeling, and computational modeling of cryogenic equipment to ensure the reliability, environmental friendliness, quiet operation, functionality, and compactness of the CTED.
Result. The CTED was developed, which, in addition to a cold source in the form of standard thermoelectric modules (TEMs), includes a mouthpiece, a transport system, and a system for removing heat from the hot junctions of the TEMs. Based on calculations in the software package, the type of TEM used in the CTED was determined. Dependencies describing the main characteristics of the CTED and the TEMs comprising it were obtained. The following graphs were plotted: the change in the refrigeration capacity of the thermoelectric module, the coefficient of performance, and the supply voltage as a function of the temperature difference between the junctions of the thermocouples for various values of the supply current; the dependence of the voltage on the thermoelectric module on the supply current for various values of the temperature difference between the junctions of the thermocouples; and the dependence of the coefficient of performance of the thermoelectric module on the supply current. The graphs are presented at a temperature of 47°C at the hot junctions of the thermocouples included in the thermoelectric module.
Conclusion. The following parameters of the thermoelectric module were determined: the number of DRIFT-1.2 thermoelectric modules is 2 pcs., the operating range of the refrigeration capacity of a single thermoelectric module is from 37 to 70 W with an average temperature difference between the junctions of 35 K, the supply current is from 4.8 to 8.2 A with a power consumption of 90 to 300 W, the coefficient of performance is from 0.2 to 0.6.
About the Authors
O. V. Evdulov
Daghestan State Technical University;
Daghestan State University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Oleg V. Evdulov, Dr. Sci. (Eng), Assoc. Prof., Department of Theoretical and General Electrical Engineering, 70 I. Shamilya Ave., Makhachkala 367015;
Prof. of the Department of Engineering Physics, 43-a M. Gadzhiev St., Makhachkala 367000
A. M. Kardashev
Republican Oncology Center
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Anvar M. Kardashev, radiation therapist,
24 G. Gadzhiev St., Makhachkala 367008
G. G. Magomedov
Daghestan State Technical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Gadzhiyav G. Magomedov, Postgraduate Student, Department of Theoretical and General Electrical Engineering,
70 I. Shamilya Ave., Makhachkala 367015
M. A. Khazamova
Daghestan State Technical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Madina A. Khazamova, Cand. Sci. (Eng.), Assoc. Prof., Head of the Department of Theoretical and General Electrical Engineering,
70 I. Shamilya Ave., Makhachkala 367015
References
1. Legeza V.I., Drachev I.S., Chepur S.V. Complications of radiation antitumor therapy. St. Petersburg: SpetsLit, 2022; 207 (In Russ)
2. Elting L.S. Keefe D.M. Sonis S.T., [et al.] Patient-reported measurements of oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients treated with radiotherapy with or whitout chemotherapy. Cancer. 2008;113(10): 2704-2713.
3. Trotti A., Bellm L.A., Epstein B., [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. Radiotherapy Oncology. 2003;66 (3):253-262.
4. Shih A., Miaskowski C., Dodd M.J., [et al.]. Mechanisms for radiation-induced oral mucositis and the consequences. Cancer Nursing. 2003; 26 (3): 222-229.
5. Sonis S.T. Oral mucositis in head and neck cancer: risk, biology, and management. American Society of Clinical Oncology Educational Book. 2013; 33: 236-240.
6. Lalla R.V., Sonis S.T., Peterson D.E. Management of oral mucositis in patients who have cancer. Dental Clinics of North America. 2008;52 (1): 61-77.
7. Tsan D.-L., Lin C.-Y., Kang C., [et al.]. The comparison between weekly and three-weekly cisplatin delivered concurrently with radiotherapy for patients with postoperative high-risk squamous cell carcinoma of the oral cavity. Radiotherapy Oncology. 2012;7:1-8.
8. Musio D., De Felice F., Bulzonetti N., Tombolini V. Cetuximab and oral mucositis: is it different from oral mucositis caused by other drugs? Otolaryngology. 2013;3 (4):147-150.
9. Walsh L., Gillham C., Dunne M. [et al.]. Toxicity of cetuximab versus cisplatin concurrent with radiotherapy in locally advanced head and neck squamous cell cancer (LAHNSCC). Radiother. Oncol. 2011;98 (1): 38-41.
10. Lalla R.V., Bowen J., Barasch A., [et al.]. MASCC/ISOO clinical practice guidelines for the management of mucositis secondary to cancer therap. Cancer. 2014;120 (10):1453-1461.
11. Haddad R., Sonis S., Posner M., [et al.]. Randomized phase 2 study of concomitant chemoradiotherapy using weekly carboplatin/paclitaxel with or without daily subcutaneous amifostine in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer. Cancer. 2009; 115 (19): 4514-4523.
12. Meirovitz A., Kuten M., Billan S., [et al.]. Cytokines levels, severity of acute mucositis and the need of PEG tube installation during chemo-radiation for head and neck cancer-a prospective pilot study. Radiotherapy Oncology. 2010; 5:1-7.
13. Xanthinaki A., Nicolatou-Galitis O., Athanassiadou P., [et al.]. Apoptotic and inflammation markers in oral mucositis in head and neck cancer patients receiving radiotherapy: preliminary report. Supportive Care in Cancer. 2008; 16 (9):1025-1033.
14. Java Walladbegi, Roger Henriksson, Björn Tavelin, et al. Efficacy of a novel device for cryoprevention of oral mucositis: a randomized, blinded, multicenter, parallel group, phase 3 trial. Bone marrow transplantation. 2022; 57:191-197.
15. Hu B., Shi X.-L., Chen Z.-G., Zou J. Thermoelectrics for medical applications: progress, challenges and perspectives. Chemical engineering journal. 2022; 437:135268.
16. Ismailov T.A., Yevdulov O.V., Magomedova S.G., Nabiev N.A. Model of a thermoelectric device for heat teatment of reflex-ogenic zones. Biomedical Engineering. 2020;54: 56-59.
17. Evdulov O.V., Magomedova S.G. A thermoelectric system for the treatment of periodontal diseases by local hypothermia. Biomedical Engineering. 2023; 57: 5-8.
18. Zaferani S.H., Ghomashchi R., Sams M.W., Chen Z.-G. Thermoelectric coolers as thermal management systems for medical application: design, optimization and advancement. Nano energy. 2021; 90:106572.
19. Assylbekova L., Aldiyarov N., Yevdulov O., Kuldeev N. Mathematical modeling of thermophysical processes in a thermoelectric device for cooling the brain. BioNanoScience. 2024;14:1428-1441. 20. http://www.kryotherm.ru (дата доступа 01.10.2025).
Review
For citations:
Evdulov O.V., Kardashev A.M., Magomedov G.G., Khazamova M.A. Prospects for the Use of Thermoelectric Cooling Devices for the Treatment of Radiation-Induced Oropharyngeal Syndrome. Herald of Dagestan State Technical University. Technical Sciences. 2026;53(1):6-14. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21822/2073-6185-2026-53-1-6-14
Views:
172
JATS XML
Email this article 
