PURPOSE: The randomized Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 94-13 trial revealed that coverage of the pelvic lymph nodes in high-risk prostate cancer confers an advantage (progression-free survival and biochemical failure) in patients with ≥15% risk of lymph node involvement. To facilitate an improved definition of the adjuvant target volume, precise knowledge regarding the location of the relevant lymph nodes is necessary. Therefore, we generated a three-dimensional sentinel lymph node atlas. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In 61 patients with high-risk prostate cancer, a three-dimensional visualization of sentinel lymph nodes was performed using a single photon emission computed tomography system after transrectal intraprostatic injection of 150 to 362 (median 295) mega becquerel (MBq) (99m)Technetium-nanocolloid (1.5-3 h after injection) followed by an anatomic functional image fusion. RESULTS: In all, 324 sentinel nodes in 59 of 61 patients (96.7%) were detected, with 0 to 13 nodes per patient (median 5, mean 5.3). The anatomic distribution of the sentinel nodes was as follows: external iliac 34.3%, internal iliac 17.9%, common iliac 12.7%, sacral 8.6%, perirectal 6.2%, left paraaortic 5.3%, right paraaortic 5.3%, seminal vesicle lymphatic plexus 3.1%, deep inguinal 1.5%, superior rectal 1.2%, internal pudendal 1.2%, perivesical 0.9%, inferior rectal 0.9%, retroaortic 0.3%, superficial inguinal 0.3%, and periprostatic 0.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of sentinel nodes as detected by single photon emission computed tomography imaging correlates well with the distribution determined by intraoperative gamma probe detection. A lower detection rate of sentinels in close proximity to the bladder and seminal vesicles is probably caused by the radionuclide accumulation in the bladder. In regard to intensity-modulated radiotherapy techniques, the presented anatomic atlas may allow optimized target volume definitions.
PURPOSE: The randomized Radiation Therapy Oncology Group 94-13 trial revealed that coverage of the pelvic lymph nodes in high-risk prostate cancer confers an advantage (progression-free survival and biochemical failure) in patients with ≥15% risk of lymph node involvement. To facilitate an improved definition of the adjuvant target volume, precise knowledge regarding the location of the relevant lymph nodes is necessary. Therefore, we generated a three-dimensional sentinel lymph node atlas. METHODS AND MATERIALS: In 61 patients with high-risk prostate cancer, a three-dimensional visualization of sentinel lymph nodes was performed using a single photon emission computed tomography system after transrectal intraprostatic injection of 150 to 362 (median 295) mega becquerel (MBq) (99m)Technetium-nanocolloid (1.5-3 h after injection) followed by an anatomic functional image fusion. RESULTS: In all, 324 sentinel nodes in 59 of 61 patients (96.7%) were detected, with 0 to 13 nodes per patient (median 5, mean 5.3). The anatomic distribution of the sentinel nodes was as follows: external iliac 34.3%, internal iliac 17.9%, common iliac 12.7%, sacral 8.6%, perirectal 6.2%, left paraaortic 5.3%, right paraaortic 5.3%, seminal vesicle lymphatic plexus 3.1%, deep inguinal 1.5%, superior rectal 1.2%, internal pudendal 1.2%, perivesical 0.9%, inferior rectal 0.9%, retroaortic 0.3%, superficial inguinal 0.3%, and periprostatic 0.3%. CONCLUSIONS: The distribution of sentinel nodes as detected by single photon emission computed tomography imaging correlates well with the distribution determined by intraoperative gamma probe detection. A lower detection rate of sentinels in close proximity to the bladder and seminal vesicles is probably caused by the radionuclide accumulation in the bladder. In regard to intensity-modulated radiotherapy techniques, the presented anatomic atlas may allow optimized target volume definitions.
Authors: J Boda-Heggemann; M Guckenberger; U Ganswindt; C Belka; H Wertz; M Blessing; F Wenz; M Fuss; F Lohr Journal: Radiologe Date: 2012-03 Impact factor: 0.635
Authors: Hanneke J M Meijer; Oscar A Debats; Emile N J Th van Lin; Marco van Vulpen; J Alfred Witjes; Wim J G Oyen; Jelle O Barentsz; Johannes H A M Kaanders Journal: Nat Rev Urol Date: 2013-05-28 Impact factor: 14.432
Authors: A-C Müller; J Lütjens; M Alber; F Eckert; M Bamberg; D Schilling; C Belka; U Ganswindt Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-10-11 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Baris Turkbey; Robert F Hoyt; Harsh K Agarwal; Marcelino Bernardo; Sandeep Sankineni; Linda Johnson; Kinzya B Grant; Soroush Rais-Bahrami; Hisataka Kobayashi; Bradford J Wood; Peter A Pinto; Gary L Griffiths; Peter L Choyke Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2015-02-13 Impact factor: 3.173
Authors: Gilles Créhange; Chien Peter Chen; Charles C Hsu; Norbert Kased; Fergus V Coakley; John Kurhanewicz; Mack Roach Journal: Cancer Treat Rev Date: 2012-06-15 Impact factor: 12.111