Literature DB >> 25944395

Dosimetric comparison of brachyablation and stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy in the treatment of liver metastasis.

J Daniel Pennington1, Sang June Park1, Narine Abgaryan1, Robyn Banerjee1, Percy P Lee1, Christopher Loh2, Edward Lee2, D Jeffrey Demanes1, Mitchell Kamrava3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: We compared the dosimetry of brachyablation (BA) and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) in the treatment of liver metastases. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Treatment plans for 10 consecutive liver metastasis patients, treated with SABR, were replanned for BA. BA treatment was planned using five 12 Gy fractions to the same planning target volume (PTV) used for SABR. Dosimetric parameters were compared using a Student's paired t test. RESULTS AND
CONCLUSIONS: BA and SABR plans had similar mean volume receiving 100% of the prescribed dose (94.1% vs. 93.9% of PTV, p = 0.8). Mean volume receiving 150% of the prescribed dose for BA was 63.6%, whereas for SABR it was 0. The minimum dose to the PTV was 65.8% for BA, whereas for SABR it was 87.4% (p = 0.0002). Liver volume receiving ≥15 Gy was similar for BA and SABR (278 vs. 256 cc, p = 0.3). Small bowel mean dose, as percent prescription dose, was higher for BA (10.8% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.006). Stomach mean dose was similar (4.9% vs. 4.8% of prescription dose, p = 0.98). Right kidney mean dose was greater for BA (6.7% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.07). BA leads to a higher target dose, similar dose to organs at risk, but potentially with lower target coverage compared with SABR. Further work is needed to determine ideal suitability for mono vs. combination therapy with this approach.
Copyright © 2015 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Brachyablation; Image guided brachytherapy; Liver metastasis; SABR; Stereotactic body radiotherapy

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25944395     DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2015.04.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brachytherapy        ISSN: 1538-4721            Impact factor:   2.362


  6 in total

1.  Point/Counterpoint. Medical use of all high activity sources should be eliminated for security concerns.

Authors:  Jacek Capala; Steven J Goetsch; Colin G Orton
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Prospective evaluation of CT-guided HDR brachytherapy as a local ablative treatment for renal masses: a single-arm pilot trial.

Authors:  R Damm; T Streitparth; P Hass; M Seidensticker; C Heinze; M Powerski; J J Wendler; U B Liehr; K Mohnike; M Pech; J Ricke
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2019-07-25       Impact factor: 3.621

3.  Image-guided high-dose-rate brachytherapy: preliminary outcomes and toxicity of a joint interventional radiology and radiation oncology technique for achieving local control in challenging cases.

Authors:  Amar U Kishan; Edward W Lee; Justin McWilliams; David Lu; Scott Genshaft; Kambiz Motamedi; D Jeffrey Demanes; Sang June Park; Mary Ann Hagio; Pin-Chieh Wang; Mitchell Kamrava
Journal:  J Contemp Brachytherapy       Date:  2015-10-13

4.  Dosimetric comparison of CT-guided iodine-125 seed stereotactic brachytherapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy in the treatment of NSCLC.

Authors:  Ranran Li; Ying Zhang; Yuan Yuan; Qi Lin; Jianjian Dai; Ruicai Xu; Xudong Hu; Mingyong Han
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-11-09       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Comparison of liver exposure in CT-guided high-dose rate (HDR) interstitial brachytherapy versus SBRT in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Franziska Walter; Lukas Nierer; Maya Rottler; Anna Sophie Duque; Helmut Weingandt; Justus Well; Roel Shpani; Guillaume Landry; Max Seidensticker; Florian Streitparth; Jens Ricke; Claus Belka; Stefanie Corradini
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-05-06       Impact factor: 3.481

Review 6.  The value of brachytherapy in the age of advanced external beam radiotherapy: a review of the literature in terms of dosimetry.

Authors:  Tibor Major; Georgina Fröhlich; Péter Ágoston; Csaba Polgár; Zoltán Takácsi-Nagy
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 3.621

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.