OBJECTIVE: An analysis of CT-based dosimetry was performed to assess the efficacy of the real time method of prostate implantation, explore the relationship of various dose descriptions and determine implant factors affecting outcome. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 7/95 and 8/99, 297 patients underwent (125)I implants for T1-T2 prostate cancer and had CT-based dosimetry performed (TG43 formalism). Dosimetry was performed 1 month postimplant. Using a dose-volume histogram, doses delivered to 100%, 95%, 90%, and 80% of the prostate (D100, D95, D90, D80, respectively) as well as percentages of the gland receiving 240 Gy, 160 Gy, 140 Gy (V240, V160, V140, respectively) were reported. Correlations between the various dose parameters and D90 were generated. The effect of the number of seeds implanted, seeds/volume, prostate volume, experience as assessed by time (8/01/99-date of implant), ultrasound probe (mechanical sector vs. dual phased electronic), and the ratio of the CT dosimetry prostate volume/ultrasound implant volume (CT/US vol) were analyzed. RESULTS: The median D100, D95, D90, and D80 values were 10,200 cGy, 15,655 cGy, 17,578 cGy, and 19,873 cGy, respectively. The median V240, V160, and V140 were 56%, 94%, and 98%, respectively. Correlations of dose descriptions found a close relationship of D95, D80, V240, V160, and V140 with D90 with r values of 0.928, 0.973, 0.911, 0.816, and 0.733, respectively. D100 correlated poorly with D90 (r = 0.099). Using a stepwise regression analysis, CT/US vol ratio, prostate volume, and seed number were the only significant factors affecting D90 with CT/US vol ratio having the greatest effect. The dual-phased electronic probe was associated with fewer D90 values of less than 140 Gy (2%) compared to the mechanical sector probe (14%) (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: CT-based dosimetry results reveal the real-time implant technique to be an effective method of prostate implantation. Factors associated with more precise implantation, such as decreased postimplant edema, new technology, and increased number of seeds will lead to higher D90 values.
OBJECTIVE: An analysis of CT-based dosimetry was performed to assess the efficacy of the real time method of prostate implantation, explore the relationship of various dose descriptions and determine implant factors affecting outcome. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Between 7/95 and 8/99, 297 patients underwent (125)I implants for T1-T2 prostate cancer and had CT-based dosimetry performed (TG43 formalism). Dosimetry was performed 1 month postimplant. Using a dose-volume histogram, doses delivered to 100%, 95%, 90%, and 80% of the prostate (D100, D95, D90, D80, respectively) as well as percentages of the gland receiving 240 Gy, 160 Gy, 140 Gy (V240, V160, V140, respectively) were reported. Correlations between the various dose parameters and D90 were generated. The effect of the number of seeds implanted, seeds/volume, prostate volume, experience as assessed by time (8/01/99-date of implant), ultrasound probe (mechanical sector vs. dual phased electronic), and the ratio of the CT dosimetry prostate volume/ultrasound implant volume (CT/US vol) were analyzed. RESULTS: The median D100, D95, D90, and D80 values were 10,200 cGy, 15,655 cGy, 17,578 cGy, and 19,873 cGy, respectively. The median V240, V160, and V140 were 56%, 94%, and 98%, respectively. Correlations of dose descriptions found a close relationship of D95, D80, V240, V160, and V140 with D90 with r values of 0.928, 0.973, 0.911, 0.816, and 0.733, respectively. D100 correlated poorly with D90 (r = 0.099). Using a stepwise regression analysis, CT/US vol ratio, prostate volume, and seed number were the only significant factors affecting D90 with CT/US vol ratio having the greatest effect. The dual-phased electronic probe was associated with fewer D90 values of less than 140 Gy (2%) compared to the mechanical sector probe (14%) (p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: CT-based dosimetry results reveal the real-time implant technique to be an effective method of prostate implantation. Factors associated with more precise implantation, such as decreased postimplant edema, new technology, and increased number of seeds will lead to higher D90 values.
Authors: Michael Muntener; Alexandru Patriciu; Doru Petrisor; Dumitru Mazilu; Herman Bagga; Louis Kavoussi; Kevin Cleary; Dan Stoianovici Journal: Urology Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 2.649
Authors: V Morillo; J L Guinot; I Tortajada; J V Ricós; L Arribas; M Maroñas; M Estornell; J Casanova Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: E Le Fur; J P Malhaire; D Baverez; F Delage; M A Perrouin-Verbe; F Schlurmann; S Guerif; G Fournier; O Pradier; A Valeri Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-11-11 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Colleen A Lawton; Daniel Hunt; W Robert Lee; Leonard Gomella; David Grignon; Michael Gillin; Gerard Morton; Thomas M Pisansky; Howard Sandler Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2011-04-04 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Michelle I Echevarria; Arash O Naghavi; Puja S Venkat; Yazan A Abuodeh; Carlos Chevere; Kosj Yamoah Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy Date: 2016-11-02
Authors: Kevin Martell; Soumyajit Roy; Tyler Meyer; Jordan Stosky; Will Jiang; Kundan Thind; Michael Roumeliotis; John Bosch; Steve Angyalfi; Harvey Quon; Siraj Husain Journal: Heliyon Date: 2020-06-07