Mineko Uemae | PubMed Health

PubMed2006

Difference in rectal dosimetry between pre-plan and post-implant analysis in transperineal interstitial brachytherapy for prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To investigate differences in rectal dosimetry between pre-plan ultrasonography (US) and post-implant computed tomography (CT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Subjects comprised 49 patients who underwent prostate brachytherapy using (125)I seed implants. Prescribed dose was 145Gy to the periphery of the prostate. Differences in rectal dosimetry between pre-plan US and post-implant CT analysis were evaluated. In addition, patients were divided into two groups according to timing of pre-planning (pre-plan group, n=28; intraoperative pre-plan group, n=21), and differences in rectal dosimetry between groups were assessed. RESULTS: The average of volume differences between pre-plan and post-implant analysis (pre-plan minus post-implant analysis) for all patients were follows: -0.08 cm(3) in V60 (volume of rectal wall receiving 60% of prescribed dose); -0.05 cm(3) in V70; -0.16 cm(3) in V80; -0.38 cm(3) in V90; -0.40 cm(3) in V100; -0.32 cm(3) in V110; -0.22 cm(3) in V120; -0.15 cm(3) in V130; -0.10 cm(3) in V140; -0.07 cm(3) in V150; and -0.05 cm(3) in V160. Apparent differences between pre-plan US and post-implant CT in rectal dosimetry were small. However, considering the steep curve of the relationship between tolerable volume and dose, a large actual difference should be assumed. No advantage was identified for the intraoperative pre-plan group. Safe volume to avoid proctitis tended to be smaller on ultrasonography than on CT at 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: The present work shows that direct comparison of CT analysis and pre-plan US is unfavorable due to large differences in these modalities and overestimation of tolerable volume. However, by comprehending the degree of difference, comparison of data from CT analysis with a US pre-plan may be feasible and useful for providing feedback between these modalities.

Brachytherapy↗

PubMed2005

Simple technique to visualize random set-up displacements using a commercially available radiotherapy planning system.

PURPOSE: To visualize random set-up displacements in isodose distribution images, we introduce a simple technique using a commercially available radiotherapy planning system (RTP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A distribution of set-up displacement is known to be compatible with that of a Gaussian distribution. Based on that assumption, 41 intentionally misaligned beams with 1-mm intervals were planned in the respective weights according to Gaussian distribution. "Modified" isodose distributions were then visualized using a commercially available RTP. In the next step, only two beams misaligned with one standard deviation (SD) of the Gaussian distribution were used in place of 41 beams, as a large number of beams increases the workload and is unsuitable for clinical use. Differences between the two versions of isodose distribution images were assessed visually. RESULTS: In modified dose distribution images, the edge of distribution was dull compared to normal images. These images show that the larger SD of set-up displacement dulls the edge of dose distribution. Images from two beams were not significantly different to those from 41 beams. CONCLUSION: Using this technique, the impact of random set-up displacements was effectively reflected in isodose distribution images.

Humans↗