PURPOSE: To evaluate variations in bladder and rectal volume and the position of the vaginal vault during a 5-week course of pelvic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) after hysterectomy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-four patients were instructed how to fill their bladders before simulation and treatment. These patients underwent computed tomography simulations with full and empty bladders and then underwent rescanning twice weekly during IMRT; patients were asked to have full bladder for treatment. Bladder and rectal volumes and the positions of vaginal fiducial markers were determined, and changes in volume and position were calculated. RESULTS: The mean full and empty bladder volumes at simulation were 480 cc (range, 122-1,052) and 155 cc (range, 49-371), respectively. Bladder volumes varied widely during IMRT: the median difference between the maximum and minimum volumes was 247 cc (range, 96-585). Variations in rectal volume during IMRT were less pronounced. For the 16 patients with vaginal fiducial markers in place throughout IMRT, the median maximum movement of the markers during IMRT was 0.59 cm in the right-left direction (range, 0-0.9), 1.46 cm in the anterior-posterior direction (range, 0.8-2.79), and 1.2 cm in the superior-inferior direction (range, 0.6-2.1). Large variations in rectal or bladder volume frequently correlated with significant displacement of the vaginal apex. CONCLUSION: Although treatment with a full bladder is usually preferred because of greater sparing of small bowel, our data demonstrate that even with detailed instruction, patients are unable to maintain consistent bladder filling. Variations in organ position during IMRT can result in marked changes in the position of the target volume and the volume of small bowel exposed to high doses of radiation.
PURPOSE: To evaluate variations in bladder and rectal volume and the position of the vaginal vault during a 5-week course of pelvic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) after hysterectomy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twenty-four patients were instructed how to fill their bladders before simulation and treatment. These patients underwent computed tomography simulations with full and empty bladders and then underwent rescanning twice weekly during IMRT; patients were asked to have full bladder for treatment. Bladder and rectal volumes and the positions of vaginal fiducial markers were determined, and changes in volume and position were calculated. RESULTS: The mean full and empty bladder volumes at simulation were 480 cc (range, 122-1,052) and 155 cc (range, 49-371), respectively. Bladder volumes varied widely during IMRT: the median difference between the maximum and minimum volumes was 247 cc (range, 96-585). Variations in rectal volume during IMRT were less pronounced. For the 16 patients with vaginal fiducial markers in place throughout IMRT, the median maximum movement of the markers during IMRT was 0.59 cm in the right-left direction (range, 0-0.9), 1.46 cm in the anterior-posterior direction (range, 0.8-2.79), and 1.2 cm in the superior-inferior direction (range, 0.6-2.1). Large variations in rectal or bladder volume frequently correlated with significant displacement of the vaginal apex. CONCLUSION: Although treatment with a full bladder is usually preferred because of greater sparing of small bowel, our data demonstrate that even with detailed instruction, patients are unable to maintain consistent bladder filling. Variations in organ position during IMRT can result in marked changes in the position of the target volume and the volume of small bowel exposed to high doses of radiation.
Authors: Jeffrey S Souris; Shih-Hsun Cheng; Charles Pelizzari; Nai-Tzu Chen; Patrick La Riviere; Chin-Tu Chen; Leu-Wei Lo Journal: Appl Phys Lett Date: 2014-11-20 Impact factor: 3.791
Authors: S Chopra; A Patidar; T Dora; N Moirangthem; S N Paul; R Engineer; U Mahantshetty; S K Shrivastava Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2014-08-19 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Ann H Klopp; Anamaria R Yeung; Snehal Deshmukh; Karen M Gil; Lari Wenzel; Shannon N Westin; Kent Gifford; David K Gaffney; William Small; Spencer Thompson; Desiree E Doncals; Guilherme H C Cantuaria; Brian P Yaremko; Amy Chang; Vijayananda Kundapur; Dasarahally S Mohan; Michael L Haas; Yong Bae Kim; Catherine L Ferguson; Stephanie L Pugh; Lisa A Kachnic; Deborah W Bruner Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-07-10 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: William Small; Walter R Bosch; Mathew M Harkenrider; Jonathan B Strauss; Nadeem Abu-Rustum; Kevin V Albuquerque; Sushil Beriwal; Carien L Creutzberg; Patricia J Eifel; Beth A Erickson; Anthony W Fyles; Courtney L Hentz; Anuja Jhingran; Ann H Klopp; Charles A Kunos; Loren K Mell; Lorraine Portelance; Melanie E Powell; Akila N Viswanathan; Joseph H Yacoub; Catheryn M Yashar; Kathryn A Winter; David K Gaffney Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2020-09-06 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Garrett L Jensen; Parul N Barry; Harriet Eldredge-Hindy; Scott R Silva; Sarah L Todd; Kendall P Hammonds; Walker R Zimmerman; Daniel S Metzinger; Moataz N El-Ghamry Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy Date: 2021-05-07