C Onal1, O C Guler, Y Dolek. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University Faculty of Medicine, Adana, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence, size and predisposing factors for air pockets around the vaginal cylinder and their dosimetric effect on the vaginal mucosa. METHODS: We investigated 174 patients with endometrial carcinoma treated with external radiotherapy (RT) and brachytherapy (BRT) (101 patients, 58%) or BRT alone (73 patients, 42%). The quantity, volume and dosimetric impact of the air pockets surrounding the vaginal cylinder were quantified. The proportions of patients with or without air pockets during application were stratified according to menopausal status, treatment modality and interval between surgery and RT. RESULTS: Air pockets around the vaginal cylinder were seen in 75 patients (43%), while 99 patients (57%) had no air pockets. Only 11 patients (6.3%) received less than the prescribed dose (average 93.9% of prescribed dose; range, 79.0-99.2%). Air pockets were significantly fewer in pre-menopausal patients or in patients treated with the combination of external RT and BRT than in post-menopausal patients or patients treated with BRT alone. A significant correlation existed between the mucosal displacement of the air gap and the ratio of the measured dose at the surface of the air gap and prescribed dose (Pearson r = -0.775; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Air pockets were still a frequent problem during vaginal vault BRT, especially in post-menopausal patients or in patients treated with BRT alone, which may potentially cause dose reductions at the vaginal mucosa. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Air pockets around the vaginal cylinder remain a significant problem, which may potentially cause dose reduction in the target volume.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence, size and predisposing factors for air pockets around the vaginal cylinder and their dosimetric effect on the vaginal mucosa. METHODS: We investigated 174 patients with endometrial carcinoma treated with external radiotherapy (RT) and brachytherapy (BRT) (101 patients, 58%) or BRT alone (73 patients, 42%). The quantity, volume and dosimetric impact of the air pockets surrounding the vaginal cylinder were quantified. The proportions of patients with or without air pockets during application were stratified according to menopausal status, treatment modality and interval between surgery and RT. RESULTS: Air pockets around the vaginal cylinder were seen in 75 patients (43%), while 99 patients (57%) had no air pockets. Only 11 patients (6.3%) received less than the prescribed dose (average 93.9% of prescribed dose; range, 79.0-99.2%). Air pockets were significantly fewer in pre-menopausal patients or in patients treated with the combination of external RT and BRT than in post-menopausal patients or patients treated with BRT alone. A significant correlation existed between the mucosal displacement of the air gap and the ratio of the measured dose at the surface of the air gap and prescribed dose (Pearson r = -0.775; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Air pockets were still a frequent problem during vaginal vault BRT, especially in post-menopausal patients or in patients treated with BRT alone, which may potentially cause dose reductions at the vaginal mucosa. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Air pockets around the vaginal cylinder remain a significant problem, which may potentially cause dose reduction in the target volume.
Authors: Mark J Rivard; Bert M Coursey; Larry A DeWerd; William F Hanson; M Saiful Huq; Geoffrey S Ibbott; Michael G Mitch; Ravinder Nath; Jeffrey F Williamson Journal: Med Phys Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Surbhi Grover; Christine E Hill-Kayser; Carolyn Vachani; Margaret K Hampshire; Gloria A DiLullo; James M Metz Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2011-11-23 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: C L Creutzberg; W L van Putten; P C Koper; M L Lybeert; J J Jobsen; C C Wárlám-Rodenhuis; K A De Winter; L C Lutgens; A C van den Bergh; E van de Steen-Banasik; H Beerman; M van Lent Journal: Lancet Date: 2000-04-22 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: R A Nout; V T H B M Smit; H Putter; I M Jürgenliemk-Schulz; J J Jobsen; L C H W Lutgens; E M van der Steen-Banasik; J W M Mens; A Slot; M C Stenfert Kroese; B N F M van Bunningen; A C Ansink; W L J van Putten; C L Creutzberg Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-03-06 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Paula V C Rittenberg; Robert J Lotocki; Mark S Heywood; Keith D Jones; Garry V Krepart Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Christian Kirisits; Mark J Rivard; Dimos Baltas; Facundo Ballester; Marisol De Brabandere; Rob van der Laarse; Yury Niatsetski; Panagiotis Papagiannis; Taran Paulsen Hellebust; Jose Perez-Calatayud; Kari Tanderup; Jack L M Venselaar; Frank-André Siebert Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2013-11-30 Impact factor: 6.280