PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy and dosimetric consequences of defining a surrogate urethra at the geometric center of the prostate in postimplant CT scans. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eighty postimplant CT scans were obtained with a Foley catheter in place at Day 0 and at 1 month for 40 patients who had undergone (125)I prostate brachytherapy. The percentage of urethral volume receiving at least 275% of the prescribed dose (uV(275)), uV(250), uV(200), uV(150), maximal dose received by 90% of urethral volume (uD(90)), uD(70), uD(30), and uD(1) were measured for the Foley catheter and surrogate urethra. The distance between the Foley catheter and surrogate urethra was measured at the base, middle, and apex of the prostate. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was found in all the above-listed dosimetric parameters between the Foley catheter and surrogate urethra at Day 0 (p <or= 0.001). At 1 month, the uD(90), uD(70), and uD(1) remained significantly different between the Foley catheter and surrogate urethra (p <or= 0.05). The difference in the uV(275) (p = 0.055) and uV(150) (p = 0.059) between the Foley catheter and surrogate urethra showed a trend toward statistical significance at 1 month. The uV(250), uV(200), and uD(30) were greater for the surrogate urethra than for the Foley catheter at 1 month, but were not significantly different statistically. The mean distance between the Foley catheter and the surrogate urethra was greatest at the base (1.2 cm) in the vertical axis at Day 0 and decreased substantially to 0.87 cm at 1 month (p = 0.0004). CONCLUSION: Using a surrogate urethra at the geometric center of the prostate may significantly overestimate the urethral dose at Day 0 and certain dosimetric parameters at 1 month. An alternative position for a surrogate urethra accounting for the difference in the location of the Foley catheter near the base of the prostate at Day 0 and 1 month could be considered in future studies.
PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy and dosimetric consequences of defining a surrogate urethra at the geometric center of the prostate in postimplant CT scans. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Eighty postimplant CT scans were obtained with a Foley catheter in place at Day 0 and at 1 month for 40 patients who had undergone (125)I prostate brachytherapy. The percentage of urethral volume receiving at least 275% of the prescribed dose (uV(275)), uV(250), uV(200), uV(150), maximal dose received by 90% of urethral volume (uD(90)), uD(70), uD(30), and uD(1) were measured for the Foley catheter and surrogate urethra. The distance between the Foley catheter and surrogate urethra was measured at the base, middle, and apex of the prostate. RESULTS: A statistically significant difference was found in all the above-listed dosimetric parameters between the Foley catheter and surrogate urethra at Day 0 (p <or= 0.001). At 1 month, the uD(90), uD(70), and uD(1) remained significantly different between the Foley catheter and surrogate urethra (p <or= 0.05). The difference in the uV(275) (p = 0.055) and uV(150) (p = 0.059) between the Foley catheter and surrogate urethra showed a trend toward statistical significance at 1 month. The uV(250), uV(200), and uD(30) were greater for the surrogate urethra than for the Foley catheter at 1 month, but were not significantly different statistically. The mean distance between the Foley catheter and the surrogate urethra was greatest at the base (1.2 cm) in the vertical axis at Day 0 and decreased substantially to 0.87 cm at 1 month (p = 0.0004). CONCLUSION: Using a surrogate urethra at the geometric center of the prostate may significantly overestimate the urethral dose at Day 0 and certain dosimetric parameters at 1 month. An alternative position for a surrogate urethra accounting for the difference in the location of the Foley catheter near the base of the prostate at Day 0 and 1 month could be considered in future studies.
Authors: Michael C Repka; Shan Guleria; Robyn A Cyr; Thomas M Yung; Harsha Koneru; Leonard N Chen; Siyuan Lei; Brian T Collins; Pranay Krishnan; Simeng Suy; Anatoly Dritschilo; John Lynch; Sean P Collins Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 6.244