Literature DB >> 30146092

A Prospective Comparison of Computed Tomography with Transrectal Ultrasonography Assistance and Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Target-Volume Definition During Image Guided Adaptive Brachytherapy for Cervical Cancers.

Umesh Mahantshetty1, Pushpa Naga Ch2, Chira Ranjan Khadanga2, Shivakumar Gudi2, Supriya Chopra2, Lavanya Gurram2, Swamidas Jamema2, Yogesh Ghadi2, Shyamkishore Shrivastava3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Although magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) represents the gold standard for image guided adaptive brachytherapy (IGABT) for cervical cancer, the majority of brachytherapy (BT) continues to be guided by computed tomography (CT). However, CT seems to overestimate the target-volume definition, and the potential of transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) needs further evaluation. This prospective, comparative study aimed to evaluate CT-based target contouring with the incorporation of TRUS during BT. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with locally advanced cervical cancer undergoing magnetic resonance IGABT between January 2013 and March 2014 were included. During the BT procedure, TRUS imaging with central tandem in situ was acquired at 3 representative levels. Reference points/dimensions (D1-D4) of the hypoechoic region on TRUS images with respect to the central tandem were recorded. CT and magnetic resonance BT planning imaging was performed after BT application. The high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) was contoured on CT scans with incorporation of clinical and TRUS imaging findings and was compared with the gold standard MRI-based target approach.
RESULTS: The image sets of 25 patients (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics clinical stage IIB [11; 44%] and IIIB [14; 56%]) were evaluable. The mean (±standard deviation) volumes of HR-CTV on CT and MRI imaging were 39.1 (±20) cm³ and 39 (±19) cm³, respectively (r = 0.92; P < .001). A significant correlation was found between the HR-CTV dimensions (width and thickness) of CT and MRI scans at various levels (r = 0.70-0.80; P < .001). In addition, the absolute differences in target dimensions between CT and MRI were <0.5 cm. A strong correlation was seen between CT and MRI for patients with medial and lateral parametrial invasion (P < .05) compared with no parametrial disease at BT. Furthermore, the mean differences in HR-CTV width between CT and MRI contours at various levels, irrespective of parametrial involvement, was only 0.1 to 0.4 cm.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that a CT-based target and organ-at-risk delineation using MRI at diagnosis and real-time TRUS information during BT seems comparable with the gold standard MRI-based approach in IGABT for cervical cancer.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30146092     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.05.080

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  8 in total

1.  Comparison of computed tomography- and magnetic resonance imaging-based target delineation for cervical cancer brachytherapy.

Authors:  Fang Wang; Luyi Bu; Qun Wu; Xue Jiang; Lingyun Wu; Yu Li; Bin Xi; Zhongjie Lu; Senxiang Yan
Journal:  J Contemp Brachytherapy       Date:  2020-08-21

Review 2.  Radiotherapy for cervical cancer: Chilean consensus of the Society of Radiation Oncology.

Authors:  Felipe Carvajal; Claudia Carvajal; Tomás Merino; Verónica López; Javier Retamales; Evelyn San Martín; Freddy Alarcón; Mónica Cuevas; Francisca Barahona; Ignacio Véliz; Juvenal A Ríos; Sergio Becerra
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2021-04-14

3.  Hybrid TRUS/CT with optical tracking for target delineation in image-guided adaptive brachytherapy for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Stéphanie Smet; Nicole Nesvacil; Johannes Knoth; Alina Sturdza; Dina Najjari-Jamal; Filip Jelinek; Gernot Kronreif; Richard Pötter; Joachim Widder; Christian Kirisits; Maximilian P Schmid
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2020-07-03       Impact factor: 3.621

4.  Quantitative and qualitative application of clinical drawings for image-guided brachytherapy in cervical cancer patients.

Authors:  Umesh Mahantshetty; Susovan Banerjee; Alina Sturdza; Christian Kirisits; Katarina Majercakova; Maximilian P Schmid; Vinod Hande; Richard Pötter
Journal:  J Contemp Brachytherapy       Date:  2021-10-25

5.  Dosimetric impact of target definition in brachytherapy for cervical cancer - Computed tomography and trans rectal ultrasound versus magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Jamema Swamidas; Jeevanshu Jain; Nicole Nesvacil; Kari Tanderup; Christian Kirisits; Max Schmid; Priyanka Agarwal; Kishore Joshi; Pushpa Naga; Chira Ranjan Khadanga; Shivakumar Gudi; Lavanya Gurram; Supriya Chopra; Umesh Mahantshetty
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2022-03-04

Review 6.  Contribution of Tata Memorial Centre, India, to cervical cancer care: Journey of two decades.

Authors:  Anuj Kumar; Supriya Chopra; Sudeep Gupta
Journal:  Indian J Med Res       Date:  2021-08       Impact factor: 5.274

7.  Patterns of cervical cancer brachytherapy in India: results of an online survey supported by the Indian Brachytherapy Society.

Authors:  Abhishek Chatterjee; Surbhi Grover; Lavanya Gurram; Supriya Sastri; Umesh Mahantshetty
Journal:  J Contemp Brachytherapy       Date:  2019-12-06

8.  IBS-GEC ESTRO-ABS recommendations for CT based contouring in image guided adaptive brachytherapy for cervical cancer.

Authors:  Umesh Mahantshetty; Richard Poetter; Sushil Beriwal; Surbhi Grover; Gurram Lavanya; Bhavana Rai; Primoz Petric; Kari Tanderup; Heloisa Carvalho; Neamat Hegazy; Sandy Mohamed; Tatsuya Ohno; Napapat Amornwichet
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2021-05-18       Impact factor: 6.280

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.