| Literature DB >> 35079251 |
Revathy Krishnamurthy1, Lavanya Gurram1, Yogesh Ghadi2, Dheera Aravindhan2, Libin Scaria2, Satish Kohle2, Sudarshan Kadam2, Supriya Chopra1, Umesh Mahantshetty1,3.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Treatment of isolated post-surgical vault recurrence of cervical and endometrial cancers in previously unirradiated patients includes external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) ± concomitant chemotherapy, followed by brachytherapy (BT) boost. Supra-vaginal component of vault disease often requires interstitial BT for optimal dose coverage. We describe technical details and preliminary case series using modified Houdek vault applicator (MHVA) developed at our institution for limited intra-cavitary plus interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) vault BT.Entities:
Keywords: brachytherapy; interstitial radiotherapy; intra-cavity radiotherapy; vaginal vault
Year: 2021 PMID: 35079251 PMCID: PMC8782071 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2021.112116
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Contemp Brachytherapy ISSN: 2081-2841
Fig. 1A) Acrylic caps, B) Schematic diagram of a 26 mm acrylic cap, C) Ring and central tandem
Fig. 2Example of a patient who underwent modified Houdek application with clinical, radiological, and planning details. A) Tumor at diagnosis with implanted silver markers; B) Tumor at brachytherapy; C) MHVA assembly; D) Reconstruction; E) Treatment planning
Comparison of vault applicators
| Central vaginal source (CVS) [ | Multi-channel vaginal cylinder [ | Modified Houdek vault applicator | Perineal template [ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | Cylinders of different diameters fitted around central source | Cylinders of different diameters with grooves for peripheral sources fitted around central source | Short central tandem with ring fitted with acrylic cap with concentric holes for needles | Plastic perineal template with central hole for obturator and multiple straight, and angled holes for needles |
| Mean rectal dose (2 cc) | 87.0% (±10) | 72.9% (±8.6) | 67.11% (±8.4) | 75.0% (±25.0) |
| Mean bladder dose (2 cc) | 71.4% (±12.9) | 70.0% (±11.4) | 70.8% (±13.2) | 32.5% (±25.0) |
| Advantages | Easy application and planning, it can be done under local anesthesia | Easy application, it can be done under local anesthesia, differential loading of peripheral sources | Easy application, good coverage, variable needle placement, apex coverage good | Very versatile applicator, good coverage of target, and sparing of OARs |
| Limitations | Apex under coverage, high bladder and rectum doses | Apex under coverage, lateral coverage limited | Lateral coverage limited | Difficult procedure requiring expertise, patient immobilized for 3 days, cumbersome |