| Literature DB >> 28533804 |
Tomoaki Tamaki1,2,3, Kazunori Miyaura2, Toshihiro Murakami2, Yu Kumazaki2, Yoshiyuki Suzuki1, Takashi Nakano3, Shingo Kato2.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the feasibility of applying trans-applicator intracavitary ultrasonography to image-guided brachytherapy for cervical cancer.Entities:
Keywords: brachytherapy; cervical cancer; intracavitary ultrasonography
Year: 2017 PMID: 28533804 PMCID: PMC5437077 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2017.66588
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy ISSN: 2081-2841
Fig. 1A case involving weekly intracavitary/interstitial brachytherapy sessions, in which intracavitary ultrasonography was useful. In our practice, we routinely perform pre-brachytherapy diagnostic magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (A) for reference during brachytherapy sessions. Because the shape and size of the primary tumor changes during the treatment course, computed tomography (CT) images obtained concurrently with later brachytherapy sessions (B) might not fully correlate with the pre-brachytherapy MRI data (A). The use of intracavitary ultrasonography during the brachytherapy session (C) provided a better depiction of the structures around the cervical tumor and became a good reference for CT-based brachytherapy (D, enlarged image of B)
Fig. 2Radial transducer used in this experiment
Fig. 3Three-dimensional (3D) reconstructed computed tomography (CT) (left column), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (center column), and intracavitary ultrasonography (right column) images of the phantom (top row: axial images, middle row: coronal images, bottom row: sagittal images). A 3D image was successfully reconstructed using intracavitary ultrasonography images taken from the cavity of the simulated tandem applicator. The coronal and sagittal images were comparable to those obtained with CT and MRI
Target volumes, Dice similarity coefficients (DSC; 1 = identical), and dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters
| Computed tomography | Magnetic resonance imaging | Intracavitary ultrasonography | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Target volume (ml) | 135.51 | 140.87 | 139.82 | |
| DSC: CT vs. MRI | ||||
| 0.966 | ||||
| DSC: CT vs. ICUS | ||||
| 0.965 | ||||
| DSC: MRI vs. ICUS | ||||
| 0.971 | ||||
| D50 (Gy) | 7.26 | 7.13 | 7.17 | |
| D90 (Gy) | 4.22 | 4.14 | 4.26 | |
| D98 (Gy) | 3.32 | 3.24 | 3.36 | |
| D100 (Gy) | 2.45 | 2.40 | 2.47 | |
D50, D90, D98, D100 – the minimum dose received by 50%, 90%, 98%, 100% of the target volume
Fig. 4Dose distributions of a sample brachytherapy plan according to computed tomography (left column), magnetic resonance imaging (center column), and intracavitary ultrasonography (right column). Dose distributions could be evaluated using visual observations and dose-volume histogram analyses (top row: axial images, bottom row: coronal images)