TY - JOUR
T1 - Dosimetric comparison of interactive planned and dynamic dose calculated prostate seed brachytherapy
AU - Meijer, Gert J.
AU - van den Berg, Hetty A.
AU - Hurkmans, Coen W.
AU - Stijns, Pascal E.
AU - Weterings, Jan H.
PY - 2006/9
Y1 - 2006/9
N2 - Purpose: To compare the dosimetrical results of an interactive planning procedure and a procedure based on dynamic dose calculation for permanent prostate brachytherapy. Materials and methods: Between 6/2000 and 11/2005, 510 patients underwent 125I implants for T1-T2 prostate cancer. Before 4/2003, 187 patients were treated using an interactive technique that included needle updating. After that period, 323 patients were treated with a more refined dynamic technique that included constant updating of the deposited seed position. The comparison is based on postimplant dose-volume parameters such as the V 100 and d 90 for the target, V 100 r for the rectum and d 10 u for the urethra. Furthermore, the target volume ratios (TVR ≡ V 100 body / V 100), and the homogeneity indices (HI ≡ [V 100 - V 150]/V 100) were calculated as additional quality parameters. Results: The dose outside the target volume was significantly reduced, the V 100 r decreased from 1.4 cm 3 for the interactive technique to 0.6 cm 3 for the dynamic technique. Similarly the mean TVR reduced from 1.66 to 1.44. In addition, the mean V 100 increased from 92% for the interactive procedure to 95% for the dynamic procedure. More importantly, the percentage of patients with a V 100 < 80% reduced from 5% to 1%. A slight decline was observed with regard to the d 10 u (136% vs. 140%) and the HI (0.58 vs. 0.51). Conclusion: The dynamic implant procedure resulted in improved implants. Almost ideal dose coverage was achieved, while minimizing the dose outside the prostate.
AB - Purpose: To compare the dosimetrical results of an interactive planning procedure and a procedure based on dynamic dose calculation for permanent prostate brachytherapy. Materials and methods: Between 6/2000 and 11/2005, 510 patients underwent 125I implants for T1-T2 prostate cancer. Before 4/2003, 187 patients were treated using an interactive technique that included needle updating. After that period, 323 patients were treated with a more refined dynamic technique that included constant updating of the deposited seed position. The comparison is based on postimplant dose-volume parameters such as the V 100 and d 90 for the target, V 100 r for the rectum and d 10 u for the urethra. Furthermore, the target volume ratios (TVR ≡ V 100 body / V 100), and the homogeneity indices (HI ≡ [V 100 - V 150]/V 100) were calculated as additional quality parameters. Results: The dose outside the target volume was significantly reduced, the V 100 r decreased from 1.4 cm 3 for the interactive technique to 0.6 cm 3 for the dynamic technique. Similarly the mean TVR reduced from 1.66 to 1.44. In addition, the mean V 100 increased from 92% for the interactive procedure to 95% for the dynamic procedure. More importantly, the percentage of patients with a V 100 < 80% reduced from 5% to 1%. A slight decline was observed with regard to the d 10 u (136% vs. 140%) and the HI (0.58 vs. 0.51). Conclusion: The dynamic implant procedure resulted in improved implants. Almost ideal dose coverage was achieved, while minimizing the dose outside the prostate.
KW - I
KW - Brachytherapy
KW - Dynamic dose calculation
KW - Postimplant dosimetry
KW - Prostate
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/33748880835
U2 - 10.1016/j.radonc.2006.07.038
DO - 10.1016/j.radonc.2006.07.038
M3 - Article
C2 - 16930753
AN - SCOPUS:33748880835
SN - 0167-8140
VL - 80
SP - 378
EP - 384
JO - Radiotherapy and Oncology
JF - Radiotherapy and Oncology
IS - 3
ER -
