PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 12873668

Marker seed migration in prostate localization.

Abstract

PURPOSE: Marker seed location was analyzed to test the hypothesis that there is no intraseed migration within the prostate, a premise fundamental to the technique of marker seed localization of this organ. Despite increasing interest in the use of implanted seeds as fiducial markers for gland location, there are few data available with which to evaluate the validity of this technique, particularly over the entire course of external beam radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between May 2001 and December 2001, after obtaining fully informed written consent, 9 patients with early stage prostate cancer were enrolled on an institutionally reviewed protocol. Patients had four to five marker seeds implanted into the prostate under transrectal ultrasound guidance before definitive radiotherapy. The porous gold seeds were each 1.2 x 2.0 mm in dimension. Seed locations from orthogonal radiographs based on the initial simulation and weekly orthogonal films were digitized using a CMS Focus planning system, thereby facilitating the determination of intraseed spacing. The digitization of the isocenter from each orthogonal pair of radiographs was used to determine digitizing error for seed localization. Pubic symphysis, bilateral femoral heads, and isocenter were also digitized and will be analyzed at a later date. RESULTS: Overall, the average migration of all the seeds in the patients was 1.2 +/- 0.2 (SD) mm. The greatest average movement of any seed in any patient was 1.9 mm over the entire 7-week course of radiotherapy. The smallest average movement was 0.6 mm. The greatest change in intraseed spacing in any of the patients during the full course of therapy was 6.6 mm. One seed in 1 patient was lost at the start of the third week of therapy and censored from analysis. Digitizing error in seed localization was calculated to be 0.20 +/- 0.03 (SD) mm. CONCLUSIONS: As an aggregate, there is negligible seed migration within the prostate over the entire course of definitive radiotherapy. However, there are small, detectable movements in individual seed locations, perhaps resulting from topographic changes in the gland secondary to seed placement, anatomic changes in bladder and rectum, or treatment itself. With respect to seed migration, prostate marker seeds represent an accurate and reliable surrogate of gland location during a full course of radiotherapy.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Matthew M Poggi, Dean A Gant, Wilfred Sewchand, William B Warlick. 2003-08-01. Marker seed migration in prostate localization.. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0360-3016(03)00328-6

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Dose errors due to inhomogeneities in balloon catheter brachytherapy for breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate dose errors in balloon catheter brachytherapy of breast cancer due to inhomogeneities, such as iodine-containing radiographic contrast medium in the balloon, the lack of scattering medium, and the low density of lung that are not considered by commercial treatment planning systems (TPS). METHODS AND MATERIALS: By accounting for these inhomogeneities in breast/lung phantoms, Monte Carlo simulations were performed to calculate doses in the breast and lung. Doses were also calculated by a commercial TPS. The Monte Carlo doses and the TPS doses were compared along the transverse and longitudinal axes of the source. RESULTS: The Monte Carlo doses were lower by 4-10% on the prescription line than the TPS doses, depending on the concentration (5-25% by volume) of the contrast medium, and on the direction from the source. The lack of scattering medium around the breast contributes to the differences more than the attenuation by the contrast medium. Attenuation contributed approximately 1.0-4.8% at the concentrations investigated in this study. CONCLUSIONS: Current treatment planning systems, which assume a source in a large homogeneous water-equivalent medium, significantly overestimate doses in breast brachytherapy.

Brachytherapy↗

Does prior transurethral resection of prostate compromise brachytherapy quality: a dosimetric analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate, in a retrospective review, prostate brachytherapy dosimetry outcomes relative to the transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) cavity size to address the theoretical concern that an intraprostatic cavity may hinder adequate radioactive source placement. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 73 patients who underwent prostate brachytherapy as part of their treatment of localized prostate cancer had a history of a prior TURP. Of these 73 patients, 37 underwent (125)I implantation, 19 (103)Pd implantation, and 17 partial (103)Pd implantation. The dose was calculated using the dose to 90% of the prostate gland (D(90)) from the 1-month post-implant dosimetric analysis. The doses were normalized relative to 100% of the prescription dose. Archived transrectal ultrasound images were used to determine the maximal length and width of the visible residual TURP cavities. The prolate spheroid or symmetric egg shape was used to calculate each residual cavity volume. The derived volume of the TURP cavity was divided by the measured ultrasound volume of the prostate at brachytherapy, creating a percentage of volume measurement for each prostate. All p values, unless otherwise specified, were generated by comparing patients without a visible TURP defect with the subgroups of patients with a visible defect using the Student t test. RESULTS: A visible residual TURP defect was noted on the operative transrectal ultrasound images of 55 (75%) of the 73 patients with a history of TURP before brachytherapy. The 18 patients without a visible TURP defect had a median D(90) of 96% and were used for subsequent statistical comparison. Thirty-six patients with a TURP defect <10% of the entire prostate volume had a median D(90) of 109% (p = 0.02). Thirteen patients with a TURP defect between 10% and 20% of the prostate volume had a median D(90) of 112% (p = 0.03). Six patients with a TURP defect >20% of the prostate volume had a D(90) of 89% (p = 0.43). CONCLUSION: A visible residual TURP cavity that is assumed to have a prolate spheroid shape and occupy >/=10% of a prostate volume did not appear to be a statistically significant hindrance to proper dosimetric outcome.

Brachytherapy↗