A comparison of preplan transrectal ultrasound with preplan-CT in assessing volume and number of seeds needed for real-time ultrasound-based intra-operative planning in prostate 125I seed implantation

Brachytherapy

Volumn 9, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 335-340

  Fogh, Shannon ^a   Doyle, Laura ^a   Yu, Anthony ^a   Li, Jun ^a   Weiner, Perry ^a   Suh, David ^a   Comber, Eileen ^a   Dicker, Adam P ^a   Yu, Yan ^a   Xiao, Ying ^a   Harrison, Amy ^a  

^a THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Intra operative planning; Preplan imaging; Prostate brachytherapy

Indexed keywords

ANDROGEN; IODINE 125;

ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PEROPERATIVE CARE; PREOPERATIVE CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE CANCER; REAL TIME ECHOGRAPHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TRANSRECTAL ULTRASONOGRAPHY; TREATMENT PLANNING;

BRACHYTHERAPY; HUMANS; INTRAOPERATIVE PERIOD; IODINE RADIOISOTOPES; MALE; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; RADIOTHERAPY DOSAGE; RECTUM; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 77957376781     PISSN: 15384721     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2009.09.005     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Blasko J.C., Grimm P.D., Sylvester J.E., et al. Palladium-103 brachytherapy for prostate carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 46:839-850.
2. Grimm P.D., Blasko J.C., Sylvester J.E., et al. 10-year biochemical (prostate-specific antigen) control of prostate cancer with (125)I brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001, 51:31-40.
3. Williams B.V., Horton J., Lawyer A., et al. Loading technique comparison in permanent 125I prostate implants. Med Dosim 1999, 24:273-277.
4. Yu Y., Anderson L.L., Li Z., et al. Permanent prostate seed implant brachytherapy: Report of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group No. 64. Med Phys 1999, 26:2054-2076.
5. Stock R.G., Stone N.N., Lo Y.C. Intraoperative dosimetric representation of the real-time ultrasound-guided prostate implant. Tech Urol 2000, 6:95-98.
6. Nath R., Anderson L.L., Luxton G., et al. Dosimetry of interstitial brachytherapy sources: Recommendations of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 43. American Association of Physicists in Medicine. Med Phys 1995, 22:209-234.
7. Messing E.M., Zhang J.B., Rubens D.J., et al. Intraoperative optimized inverse planning for prostate brachytherapy: Early experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999, 44:801-808.
8. Raben A., Chen H., Grebler A., et al. Prostate seed implantation using 3D-computer assisted intraoperative planning vs. a standard look-up nomogram: Improved target conformality with reduction in urethral and rectal wall dose. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004, 60:1631-1638.
9. Stock R.G., Stone N.N., Lo Y.C., et al. Postimplant dosimetry for (125)I prostate implants: Definitions and factors affecting outcome. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 48:899-906.
10. Chauveinc L., Flam T., Solignac S., et al. Prostate cancer brachytherapy: Is real-time ultrasound-based dosimetry predictive of subsequent CT-based dose distribution calculation? A study of 450 patients by the Institut Curie/Hospital Cochin (Paris) Group. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004, 59:691-695.
11. Al-Qaisieh B., Brearley E., St Clair S., et al. A study of a pretreatment method to predict the number of I-125 seeds required for prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006, 65:304-307.
12. Hilaris S., Nori D., Anderson L.L. Atlas of brachytherapy 1988, McGraw-Hill Professional, New York, NY.
13. Wu A., Lee C.C., Johnson M., et al. A new power law for determination of total (125)I seed activity for ultrasound-guided prostate implants: Clinical evaluations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 47:1397-1403.
14. Shanahan T.G., Nanavati P.J., Mueller P.W., et al. A comparison of permanent prostate brachytherapy techniques: Preplan vs. hybrid interactive planning with postimplant analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002, 53:490-496.
15. Merrick G.S., Butler W.M., Dorsey A.T., et al. Potential role of various dosimetric quality indicators in prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999, 44:717-724.
16. Nag S., Bice W., DeWyngaert K., et al. The American Brachytherapy Society recommendations for permanent prostate brachytherapy postimplant dosimetric analysis. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2000, 46:221-230.
17. D'Souza W.D., Lee H.K., Palmer M.B., et al. Is intraoperative nomogram-based overplanning of prostate implants necessary?. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003, 56:462-467.
18. Narayana V., Roberson P.L., Winfield R.J., et al. Impact of ultrasound and computed tomography prostate volume registration on evaluation of permanent prostate implants. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997, 39:341-346.
19. Hoffelt S.C., Marshall L.M., Garzotto M., et al. A comparison of CT scan to transrectal ultrasound-measured prostate volume in untreated prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2003, 57:29-32.
20. Badiozamani K.R., Wallner K., Cavanagh W., et al. Comparability of CT-based and TRUS-based prostate volumes. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999, 43:375-378.
21. Xue J., Waterman F., Handler J., et al. The effect of interobserver variability on transrectal ultrasonography-based postimplant dosimetry. Brachytherapy 2006, 5:174-182.
22. Smith S., Wallner K., Merrick G., et al. Interpretation of pre- versus postimplant TRUS images. Med Phys 2003, 30:920-924.
23. Lee W.R., Roach M., Michalski J., et al. Interobserver variability leads to significant differences in quantifiers of prostate implant adequacy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002, 54:457-461.
24. Han B.H., Wallner K., Merrick G., et al. The effect of interobserver differences in post-implant prostate CT image interpretation on dosimetric parameters. Med Phys 2003, 30:1096-1102.