A comparison between tandem and ovoids and interstitial gynecologic template brachytherapy dosimetry using a hypothetical computer model

被引:29
|
作者
Hsu, ICJ
Speight, J
Hai, J
Vigneault, E
Phillips, T
Pouliot, J
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Francisco, Dept Radiat Oncol, San Francisco, CA 94143 USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Dept Radiat Oncol, Palo Alto, CA 94304 USA
[3] Ctr Hosp Univ Quebec, Dept Radiat Oncol, Quebec City, PQ, Canada
关键词
brachytherapy; interstitial implant; GYN template;
D O I
10.1016/S0360-3016(01)02691-8
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose: To evaluate the dose distribution within the clinical target volume between two gynecologic brachytherapy systems the tandem and ovoids and the Syed-Neblett gynecologic template using a hypothetical computer model. Methods and Materials: Source positions of an intracavitary system (tandem and ovoids) and an interstitial system (GYN template) were digitized into the Nucletron Brachytherapy Planning System. The GYN template is composed of a 13-catheter implant (12 catheters plus a tandem) based on the Syed-Neblett gynecologic template. For the tandem and ovoids, the dwell times of all sources were evenly weighted to produce a pear-shaped isodose distribution. For the GYN template, the dwell times were determined using volume optimization. The prescribed dose was then normalized to point A in the intracavitary system and to a selected isodose line in the interstitial system. The treated volume in the two systems was kept approximately the same, and a cumulative dose-volume histogram of the treated volume was then generated with the Nucletron Brachytherapy Planning System to use for comparison. To evaluate the dose to a hypothetical target, in this case the cervix, a 2-cm-long, 3-cm-diameter cylinder centered along the tandem was digitized as the clinical target volume. The location of this hypothetical cervix was based on the optimal application of the brachytherapy system. A visual comparison of clinical target coverage by the treated volume on three different orthogonal planes through the treated volume was performed. The percentage dose-volume histograms of the target were generated for comparison. Multiple midline points were also placed at 5-mm intervals away from the tandem in the plane of the cervix to simulate the location of potential bladder and rectal dose points. Doses to these normal structures were calculated for comparison. Results: Although both systems covered the hypothetical cervix adequately, the interstitial system had a better coverage of the region lateral to the cervix. Smaller volumes of the vagina and uterine fundus received the full dose from the interstitial implant. The cumulative dose-volume histograms revealed larger high-dose regions within the treatment volume for the intracavitary system. The volumes receiving greater than or equal to180% of the prescription dose were 31 cc and 17 cc for the intracavitary system and interstitial system, respectively. The isodose lines showed that most of this difference results from the high-dose region around the tandem. The percentage dose-volume histograms showed that a larger percentage of cervix received a higher dose in the intracavitary system. Fifty-two percent of the target volume received 200% or higher of the prescription dose with tandem and ovoids, compared with only 20% with the template system. Analysis of dose points outside of the 100% isodose lines showed a slightly more rapid dose drop-off with the interstitial system compared to the intracavitary system. Point doses at 20, 25, and 30 mm from the tandem in the interstitial system were 100%, 69%, and 51% of prescribed dose, and from the intracavitary system were 101%, 76%, and 58%, respectively. Conclusions: Our dosimetric analysis revealed a better coverage in the parametrial regions, but underdosage of the central cervical region, for the interstitial system. On the other hand, because of the increased distance of source to dose point, there is a more rapid dose drop-off outside the treated volume with the interstitial system, which has the potential to improve tissue sparing. Based on this analysis, we caution against using a radiotherapy system with a homogenous central dose distribution when treating cervical cancer with an intact uterus. We recommend differential loading of the implant catheters with the majority of dose delivered from the tandem when using an interstitial GYN template with remote afterloader. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:538 / 543
页数:6
相关论文
共 21 条
  • [1] COMPARISON OF IPSA WITH GRAPHICAL AND DOSE POINT OPTIMIZATION FOR INTERSTITIAL GYNECOLOGIC TEMPLATE BRACHYTHERAPY
    Jamema, S.
    Sharma, S.
    Mahantshetty, U.
    Sharma, P.
    Deshpande, D.
    Shrivastava, S.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2009, 91 : S15 - S15
  • [2] Dosimetric Comparison Between Split Ring Applicator and Tandem and Ovoids for HDR Brachytherapy Boost in Cervical Cancer
    Hsu, H.
    Duckworth, T.
    Schiff, P.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2011, 81 (02): : S891 - S892
  • [3] Comparison of IPSA with dose-point optimization and manual optimization for interstitial template brachytherapy for gynecologic cancers
    Jamema, Swamidas V.
    Sharma, Smriti
    Mahantshetty, Umesh
    Engineer, Reena
    Shrivastava, Shyam K.
    Deshpande, Deepak D.
    [J]. BRACHYTHERAPY, 2011, 10 (04) : 306 - 312
  • [4] A comparison between Paris, SSDS and target optimised dosimetry for interstitial brachytherapy breast boost
    Ocampo, P
    O'Reilly, P
    Thirion, P
    Kelly, C
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2004, 71 : S46 - S46
  • [5] Dosimetric Comparison of Venezia Advanced Gynecologic Applicator and Split-Ring and Tandem Applicator in HDR Intracavitary/interstitial Brachytherapy
    Xu, Z.
    Traughber, B.
    Warrell, G.
    Muenkel, J.
    Colussi, V.
    Ellis, R.
    Podder, T.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 45 (06) : E242 - E242
  • [6] Outpatient template-guided permanent interstitial brachytherapy using 131Cs in gynecologic malignancies: Initial report
    Feddock, Jonathan
    Aryal, Prakash
    Steber, Cole
    Edwards, Jason
    Cheek, Dennis
    Randall, Marcus
    [J]. BRACHYTHERAPY, 2017, 16 (02) : 393 - 401
  • [7] Comparison of Dosimetry and Late Toxicity Between Split Ring and Tandem and Ovoid HDR Brachytherapy Applicators in Cervical Cancer
    Ishaq, O.
    Talcott, W.
    Duckworth, T.
    Lymberis, S.
    Schiff, P. B.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2015, 93 (03): : E288 - E288
  • [8] Retrospective dosimetric comparison of low-dose-rate and pulsed-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy using a tandem and mini-ovoids
    Mourtada, Firas
    Gifford, Kent A.
    Berner, Paula A.
    Horton, John L.
    Price, Michael J.
    Lawyer, Ann A.
    Eifel, Patricia J.
    [J]. MEDICAL DOSIMETRY, 2007, 32 (03) : 181 - 187
  • [9] Comparison of Vaginal Dosimetry Between Tandem Ovoid (TO) and Tandem Ring (TR) Applicator in CT-Based High Dose Rate Intracavitary Brachytherapy of Cervix
    Rangarajan, Ramya
    Saravanan, S.
    Kumari
    [J]. INDIAN JOURNAL OF GYNECOLOGIC ONCOLOGY, 2022, 20 (02)
  • [10] Comparison of Vaginal Dosimetry Between Tandem Ovoid (TO) and Tandem Ring (TR) Applicator in CT-Based High Dose Rate Intracavitary Brachytherapy of Cervix
    Ramya Rangarajan
    S. Saravanan
    [J]. Indian Journal of Gynecologic Oncology, 2022, 20