PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 2022514

RTOG quality assurance guidelines for interstitial hyperthermia.

Abstract

This document specifies the current recommendations for quality assurance for hyperthermia administration with interstitial techniques as specified by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG). The document begins by providing a brief description of the physical principles behind the use of the three most commonly used methods of interstitial hyperthermia: radiofrequency (RF-LCF), microwave antennas, and ferromagnetic seeds. Emphasis is placed on features that effect quality assurance. Specific recommendations are provided for: a) Pretreatment planning and equipment performance checks, b) Implant considerations and documentation, c) Thermometry, and d) Safety procedures. Specific details regarding quality assurance issues that are common to all local and regional hyperthermia methods are outlined in previous documents sponsored by the RTOG. It is anticipated that technological advances may lead to future modifications of this document.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

B Emami, P Stauffer, M W Dewhirst, S Prionas, T Ryan, P Corry, T Herman, D S Kapp, R J Myerson, T Samulski. 1991. RTOG quality assurance guidelines for interstitial hyperthermia.. https://doi.org/10.1016/0360-3016(91)90213-n

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[Retained foreign bodies from the view of the OR nurse].

Patient safety in the operating room is of high priority for the surgical team and for all healthcare workers involved. Counting procedures contribute to minimizing potential risks for the patients, especially in preventing them from leaving the operating room with retained, unintended foreign bodies. A total of 64% of operating room nurses involved in a survey are reported as having been involved in a surgical procedure in which the correct count prevented foreign bodies from being left in the patient. In addition, the strengths and potential weak points of the counting procedures could be identified. The results of the survey and drafts for a standard counting control as well as procedural recommendations are presented for discussion. A recommendation can be provided for each surgical department in order to check their own counting methods for avoiding potential risks.

Documentation↗