| Literature DB >> 25177244 |
Primoz Petric1, Robert Hudej2, Omar Hanuna2, Primoz Marolt2, Noora Mohammed A A Al-Hammadi3, Mohamed P Riyas3, Barbara Segedin2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Optimal applicator insertion is a precondition for the success of cervix cancer brachytherapy (BT). We aimed to assess feasibility and efficacy of MRI-assisted pre-planning, based on applicator insertion in para-cervical anaesthesia (PCA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five days prior to BT, the pre-planning procedure was performed in 18 cervix cancer patients: tandem-ring applicator was inserted under PCA, pelvic MRI obtained and applicator removed. Procedure tolerability was assessed. High risk clinical target volume (HR CTV) and organs at risk were delineated on the pre-planning MRI, virtual needles placed at optimal positions, and dose planning performed. At BT, insertion was carried out in subarachnoidal anaesthesia according to pre-planned geometry. Pre-planned and actual treatment parameters were compared.Entities:
Keywords: MRI; cervix cancer; image-guided brachytherapy; pre-planning
Year: 2014 PMID: 25177244 PMCID: PMC4110086 DOI: 10.2478/raon-2014-0009
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Radiol Oncol ISSN: 1318-2099 Impact factor: 2.991
FIGURE 1.Para-cervical injection of anaesthetic prior to the pre-planning insertion of the intracavitary applicator.
FIGURE 2.T2-weighted post-insertion pelvic MRI in para-transverse (perpendicular to cervical canal) orientation at pre-planning (A, B) and actual (C) brachytherapy. Principal steps of the pre-planning process are outlined. (A) Pre-planning MRI, obtained after insertion of the intracavitary tandem/ring applicator in para-cervical anaesthesia. Prescribed isodose of a standard intracavitary treatment plan with dose prescription at point A is shown. There is suboptimal coverage of the high risk clinical target volume (HR CTV) with the prescribed isodose at the left posteralateral aspect in this slice. In addition, the prescribed isodose extends to the bladder, exceeding our departmental dose constraints for this organ. Reducing the tandem dwell-weight in order to spare the posterior bladder wall would further compromise the coverage of the left part of the HR CTV due to unfavourable topography between the applicator and the patho-anatomical structures. (B) Virtual optimized intracavitary/interstitial pre-plan. After reducing the tandem dwell weight, two virtual interstitial needles (red circles) were placed at optimal positions within the target volume, respecting the degrees of freedom, offered by the ring cap template (Figure insert). Treatment plan optimization, utilizing needle dwell positions in addition to the intracavitary component, resulted in a pre-plan with a conformal dose distribution. The prescribed isodose conformally encompasses the HR CTV while the dose constraints for the bladder and other organs are respected. Radial angle of needle insertion position is defined on para-transverse MRI for a given ring diameter as the angle between the antero-posterior patient axis and the line, connecting the centre of the tandem and the needle. (C) Planning MRI, acquired at time of actual brachytherapy, following insertion of a combined intracavitary/interstitial applicator. In addition to the tandem/ring applicator, two interstitial needles were inserted through the ring template, aiming at an accurate reproduction of the pre-planned insertion angles and depths. Actual needle insertion angles and depths were recorded. Treatment plan optimization resulted in an actual dose distribution, comparable to the pre-planned situation. (D) Schematic representation of assessment of the geometric deviations between the pre-planned and actual implant. For each needle, the difference between the pre-planned and actual radial angle of needle insertion and depth was calculated.
Needle geometry and DVH parameters of the pre-planned and actual optimized treatment plans and the individual differences between them. Biologically equivalent doses are given (linear quadratic model, α/β=10 Gy for the HR CTV and 3 Gy for the organs at risk, half time of sublethal damage repair = 1.5 h). The differences between the pre-planned and actual geometric and dosimetric parameters were statistically non-significant. HR CTV = High Risk Clinical Target Volume
| Depth (mm) | 23 (10 – 49) | 23 (7 – 47) | 2 (0 – 10) |
| Radial angle (°) | 150 (30 – 330) | 145 (30 – 334) | 4 (0 – 30) |
| D90 (Gy) | 23.4 (20.0 – 27.1) | 23.4 (20.1 – 30.7) | 1.0 (0.0 – 3.6) |
| D100 (Gy) | 13.2 (7.1 – 17.8) | 14.9 (8.6 – 18.3) | 1.9 (0.2 – 5.8) |
| V100 (%) | 96.2 (90.0 – 99.8) | 97.9 (90.0 – 100) | 1.4 (0.1 – 9.2) |
| D2cc bladder (Gy) | 13.5 (9.1 – 16.6) | 12.9 (7.4 – 15.9) | 0.7 (0.0 – 7.3) |
| D2cc rectum (Gy) | 9.5 (4.9 – 15.8) | 8.1 (4.2 – 11.8) | 1.4 (0.3 – 11.5) |
| D2cc sigmoid (Gy) | 10.1 (4.6 – 13.4) | 9.2 (3.0 – 12.8) | 1.2 (0.0 – 5.5) |
DVH parameter values for the high risk clinical target volume (HR CTV) and the most exposed organ at risk. OIN = optimization index (D90 for the HR CTV / D2cc of the OAR max).
| D90 (Gy) | 27.9 (15.9 – 47.0) | 23.4 (20.1 – 30.7) |
| D100 (Gy) | 15.0 (7.2 – 25.7) | 14.9 (8.6 – 18.3) |
| V100 (%) | 99.0 (77.3 – 100.0) | 97.9 (90.0 – 100) |
| D2cc (Gy) | 19.0 (8.2 – 34.4) | 12.7 (9.0 – 15.9) |
| 1.0 (0.7 – 1.9) | 1.3 (1.0 – 1.8) |
FIGURE 3.D2cc to the organ at risk (OAR) receiving the highest dose and D90 to the high risk clinical target volume (HR CTV) in standard (red triangles) and optimized (green circles) plans for all patients. The doses are expressed in percentage of respective dose constraints. The lower right quadrant includes the patients in whom both the OAR and the HR CTV dose constraints were respected.