Taner Arpacı1, Gamze Uğurluer2, Emine Burçin İspir3, Alper Eken4, Tuğana Akbaş1, Meltem Serin2. 1. Department of Radiology, Acıbadem University, Acıbadem Adana Hospital, Adana, Turkey. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Acıbadem University, Acıbadem Adana Hospital, Adana, Turkey. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Acıbadem Adana Hospital, Adana, Turkey. 4. Department of Urology, Acıbadem University, Acıbadem Adana Hospital, Adana, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether significant fiducial marker migration occurs between the periods of prostatic marker insertion and computed tomography (CT) performed for radiotherapy planning and if a waiting period is necessary. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with prostate adenocarcinoma underwent fiducial marker insertion before radiotherapy between June 2013 and December 2015. Three markers were inserted by one radiologist under the guidance of transrectal ultrasonography. All patients underwent CT three hours after insertion to confirm the number and position of fiducial markers. Radiotherapy planning CT was performed on an average of 11 days (range 7-20) after insertion. CT images were imported into treatment planning system to analyze the position of fiducial markers. Point- based marker match algorithm was used to find the distance of marker migration. The mean and maximum distances between each fiducial markers were calculated. RESULTS: The mean distance of migration was 1.029±0.42 mm (range 0.23-1.93 mm) and the maximum distance was 1.361±0.59 mm (range 0.25-2.74 mm). The distance of marker migration was not statistically significant for the groups organized according to the timing of marker insertion, prostate volume, patient age, prostate specific antigen level and Gleason score. CONCLUSION: According to our results significant fiducial marker migration did not occur during the interval between insertion and treatment planning CT. It should be taken into consideration that performing simulation on the same day as marker insertion might prevent increased cost and delayed radiation therapy by saving the patients from extra visits to the clinic.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether significant fiducial marker migration occurs between the periods of prostatic marker insertion and computed tomography (CT) performed for radiotherapy planning and if a waiting period is necessary. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Thirty-nine patients with prostate adenocarcinoma underwent fiducial marker insertion before radiotherapy between June 2013 and December 2015. Three markers were inserted by one radiologist under the guidance of transrectal ultrasonography. All patients underwent CT three hours after insertion to confirm the number and position of fiducial markers. Radiotherapy planning CT was performed on an average of 11 days (range 7-20) after insertion. CT images were imported into treatment planning system to analyze the position of fiducial markers. Point- based marker match algorithm was used to find the distance of marker migration. The mean and maximum distances between each fiducial markers were calculated. RESULTS: The mean distance of migration was 1.029±0.42 mm (range 0.23-1.93 mm) and the maximum distance was 1.361±0.59 mm (range 0.25-2.74 mm). The distance of marker migration was not statistically significant for the groups organized according to the timing of marker insertion, prostate volume, patient age, prostate specific antigen level and Gleason score. CONCLUSION: According to our results significant fiducial marker migration did not occur during the interval between insertion and treatment planning CT. It should be taken into consideration that performing simulation on the same day as marker insertion might prevent increased cost and delayed radiation therapy by saving the patients from extra visits to the clinic.
Authors: S Aubin; L Beaulieu; S Pouliot; J Pouliot; R Roy; L M Girouard; N Martel-Brisson; E Vigneault; J Laverdière Journal: Med Phys Date: 2003-07 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Dale Litzenberg; Laura A Dawson; Howard Sandler; Martin G Sanda; Daniel L McShan; Randall K Ten Haken; Kwok L Lam; Kristy K Brock; James M Balter Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2002-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Kiran A Kumar; Tianming Wu; Nathan Tonlaar; Christopher Stepaniak; Kamil M Yenice; Stanley L Liauw Journal: Pract Radiat Oncol Date: 2014-12-24
Authors: Patrick A Kupelian; Twyla R Willoughby; Sanford L Meeks; Alan Forbes; Thomas Wagner; Mourad Maach; Katja M Langen Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Alan M Nichol; Kristy K Brock; Gina A Lockwood; Douglas J Moseley; Tara Rosewall; Padraig R Warde; Charles N Catton; David A Jaffray Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-11-02 Impact factor: 7.038