Comparison of CT and MR-CT fusion for prostate post-implant dosimetry

International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

Volumn 82, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 1912-1917

  Maletz, Kristina L ^a,b   Ennis, Ronald D ^a   Ostenson, Jason ^a   Pevsner, Alexander ^a   Kagen, Alexander ^c   Wernick, Iddo ^a  

^a ST LUKE S ROOSEVELT HOSPITAL CENTER   (United States)

^b Department of Neurology and the Taub Institute for Research on Alzheimer's Disease and the Aging Brain   (United States)

^c BETH ISRAEL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Brachytherapy; Dosimetry; Fusion; MRI; Prostate

Indexed keywords

BRACHYTHERAPY; FUSION TECHNIQUES; INTRA-OBSERVER VARIABILITY; MR IMAGES; POSTIMPLANT DOSIMETRY; PROSTATE; PROSTATE BRACHYTHERAPY; PROSTATE VOLUME; REPRODUCIBILITIES; VOLUME RATIO;

FUSION REACTIONS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; ONCOLOGY; RADIOTHERAPY; TISSUE; UROLOGY;

DOSIMETRY;

PALLADIUM 103;

ARTICLE; BRACHYTHERAPY; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DOSIMETRY; EXTERNAL BEAM RADIOTHERAPY; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE PROCESSING; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; ORGAN SIZE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSTATE; PROSTATE CANCER; RADIATION DOSE DISTRIBUTION; VOLUMETRY;

BRACHYTHERAPY; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; OBSERVER VARIATION; PALLADIUM; PROSTATE; PROSTATIC NEOPLASMS; RADIOISOTOPES; RADIOMETRY; RADIOTHERAPY DOSAGE; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84858642626     PISSN: 03603016     EISSN: 1879355X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.01.064     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Merrick G, Butler W, Dorsey A, et al. Potential role of various dosimetric quality indicators in prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;44:717-724. (Pubitemid 29258448)
2. 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 1999;44:789-799. (Pubitemid 29284127)
3. Potters L. Permanent prostate brachytherapy in men with clinically localised prostate cancer. Clin Oncol 2003;15:301-315. (Pubitemid 37069640)
4. Polo A, Cattani F, Vavassori A, et al. MR and CT image fusion for postimplant analysis in permenent prostate seed implants. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004;60:1572-1579. (Pubitemid 39601875)
5. Smith W, Lewis C, Bauman G, et al. Prostate volume contouring: A 3D analysis of segmentation using 3DTRUS, CT, and MR. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;67:1238-1247.
6. Bloch BN, Lenkinski R, Helbich T, et al. Prostate postbrachytherapy seed distribution: Comparison of high-resolution, contrast-enhanced, T1- and T2-weighted endorectal magnetic resonance imaging versus computed tomography: Initial experience. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007;69:70-78. (Pubitemid 47247502)
7. Amdur RJ, Gladstone D, Leopold KA, et al. Prostate seed implant quality assessment using MR and CT image fusion. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1999;43:67-72. (Pubitemid 29065833)
8. Moerland M, Wijrdeman H, Beersma R, et al. Evaluation of permanent I-125 prostate implants using radiography and magnetic resonancy imaging. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1997;37:927-933. (Pubitemid 27181328)
9. Prete J, Prestidge B, Bice W, et al. Comparison of MRI- and CT-based postimplant dosimetric analysis of transperineal interstitial permanent prostate brachytherapy. Radiat Oncol Invest 1998;6:90-96. (Pubitemid 28185740)
10. Tanaka O, Hayashi S, Matsuo M, et al. Comparison of MRI-based and CT/MRI fusion-based postimplant dosimetric analysis of prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006;66:597-602. (Pubitemid 44332771)
11. McLaughlin PW, Narayana V, Drake DG, et al. Comparison of MRI pulse sequences in defining prostate volume after permanent implantation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002;54:703-711.
12. Dubois D, Prestidge B, Hotchkiss L. Intraobserver and interobserver variability of MR imaging- and CT-derived prostate volumes after transperineal interstitial permanent prostate brachytherapy. Radiology 1998;207:785-789.
13. Rahmouni A, Yang A, Tempany C, et al. Accuracy of in vivo assessment of prostatic volume by MRI and transrectal ultrasonography. J Comput Assist Tomog 1992;16:935-940.
14. Lee WR, Roach M, Michalski J, et al. Interobserver variability leads to significant differences in qualifiers of prostate implant adequacy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2002;54:457-461. (Pubitemid 35286812)
15. Crook J, Milosevic M, Catton P, et al. Interobserver variation in postimplant computed tomography contouring affects quality assessment of prostate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy 2002;1:66-73. (Pubitemid 37329415)
16. Heijmink SWTPJ, Scheenen TWJ, van Lin ENJT, et al. Changes in prostate shape and volume and their implications for radiotherapy after introduction of endorectal balloon as determined by MRI at 3T. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009;73:1446-1453.
17. Cowper SE. Nephrogenic fibrosing dermopathy: The first 6 years. Curr Opin Rheumatol 2003;15:785-790. (Pubitemid 38156308)
18. Sasaki DK, Malkoske K, Bews J, et al. A comparison of MR/CT fusion versus CT alone for assesment of implant quality in permanent prostate brachytherapy. Med Phys 2008;35:3417.
19. Acher P, Rhode K, Morris S, et al. Comparison of combined x-ray radiography and magnetic resonance (XMR) imaging-versus computed tomography-based dosimetry for the evaluation of permanent prostate brachytherapy implants. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;71:1518-1525.
20. Lee PC, Moran BJ. 125 Gy or 135 Gy? Comments on the American Brachytherapy Society article by Beyer et al. IJROBP 2000;47:273-275. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;49:897-898. (Pubitemid 32112213)
21. Michalski JM, Williamson JF. In regard to Beyer, Nath, and Butler et al. IJROBP 2000;47:273-275. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001;49:900. (Pubitemid 32112215)
22. Milosevic M, Voruganti S, Blend R, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for localization of the prostatic apex: Comparison to computed tomography (CT) and urethrography. Radiother Oncol 1998;47:277-284. (Pubitemid 28293649)