Brachytherapy
Volume 6, Issue 4 , Pages 246-253 , October 2007

Comparison of intraoperative ultrasound with postimplant computed tomography–dosimetric values at Day 1 and Day 30 after prostate brachytherapy

  • Toshio Ohashi

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, National Hospital Organization Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan
    • Department of Radiology, Keio University, School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Department of Radiology, Keio University, School of Medicine, 35 Shinanomachi, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 160-8582, Japan. Tel.: +81-3-3353-1211; fax: +81-3-3359-7425.
    • ,
  • Atsunori Yorozu

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, National Hospital Organization Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan
    • ,
  • Kazuhito Toya

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, National Hospital Organization Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan
    • ,
  • Shiro Saito

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, National Hospital Organization Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan
    • ,
  • Tetsuo Momma

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, National Hospital Organization Saitama Hospital, Saitama, Japan
    • ,
  • Hirohiko Nagata

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, National Hospital Organization Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan
    • ,
  • Michio Kosugi

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, National Hospital Organization Tokyo Medical Center, Tokyo, Japan
    • ,
  • Naoyuki Shigematsu

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Keio University, School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
    • ,
  • Atsushi Kubo

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiology, Keio University, School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan

Received 11 May 2007 ,Revised 6 July 2007 ,Accepted 23 August 2007.

References 

  1. Ragde H, Elgamal AA, Snow PB, et al. Ten-year disease free survival after transperineal sonography-guided iodine-125 brachytherapy with or without 45-Gray external beam irradiation in the treatment of patients with clinically localized, low to high Gleason grade prostate carcinoma. [See comments] Cancer. 1998;83:989–1001
  2. Merrick GS, Butler WM, Lief JH, et al. Is brachytherapy comparable with radical prostatectomy and external-beam radiation for clinically localized prostate cancer?. Tech Urol. 2001;7:12–19
  3. Stock RG, Stone NN, Cesaretti JA, et al. Biologically effective dose values for prostate brachytherapy: Effects on PSA failure and posttreatment biopsy results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;64:527–533
  4. Potters L, Huang D, Calugaru E, et al. Importance of implant dosimetry for patients undergoing prostate brachytherapy. Urology. 2003;62:1073–1077
  5. Nag S, Ciezki JP, Cormack R, et al. Intraoperative planning and evaluation of permanent prostate brachytherapy: Report of the American Brachytherapy Society. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;51:1422–1430
  6. Blasko JC, Ragde H, Grimm PD. Transperineal ultrasound guided implantation of the prostate: Morbidity and complications. Scand J Urol Nephrol Suppl. 1991;137:113–118
  7. Merrick GS, Butler WM, Wallner KE, et al. Variability of prostate brachytherapy preimplant dosimetry: A multi-institutional analysis. Brachytherapy. 2005;4:241–251
  8. Waterman FM, Yue N, Corn BW, et al. Edema associated with I-125 or Pd-103 prostate brachytherapy and its impact on post-implant dosimetry: An analysis based on serial CT acquisition. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998;41:1069–1077
  9. Toya K, Yorozu A, Ohashi T, et al. Experience of brachytherapy using I-125 seed permanent implants for localized prostate cancer. Nippon Acta Radiologica. 2005;65:432–437
  10. Stone NN, Stock RG, DeWyngaert JK, et al. Prostate brachytherapy: Improvements in prostate volume measurements and dose distribution using interactive ultrasound guided implantation and three-dimensional dosimetry. Radiat Oncol Investig. 1995;3:185–195
  11. Stock RG, Stone NN, Wesson MF, et al. A modified technique allowing interactive ultrasound-guided three-dimensional transperineal prostate implantation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1995;32:219–225
  12. Potters L, Calguaru E, Thornton KB, et al. Toward a dynamic real-time intraoperative permanent prostate brachytherapy methodology. Brachytherapy. 2003;2:172–180
  13. Potters L, Calguaru E, Jassai A, et al. Is there a role for postimplant dosimetry after real-time dynamic permanent prostate brachytherapy?. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;65:1014–1019
  14. Kwok Y, DiBiase SJ, Amin PP, et al. Risk group stratification in patients undergoing permanent 125I prostate brachytherapy as monotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;53:588–594
  15. Cancer Registration Committee of the Japanese Urological Association . Clinicopathological statistics on registered prostate cancer patients in Japan: 2000 Report from the Japanese Urological Association. Int J Urol. 2005;12:46–61
  16. Stock RG, Stone NN, Lo YC, et al. Postimplant dosimetry for 125I prostate implants: Definitions and factors affecting outcome. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;48:899–906
  17. Stock RG, Stone NN. Importance of post-implant dosimetry in permanent prostate brachytherapy. Eur Urol. 2002;41:434–439
  18. Stone NN, Hong S, Lo YC, et al. Comparison of intraoperative dosimetric implant representation with postimplant dosimetry in patients receiving prostate brachytherapy. Brachytherapy. 2003;2:17–25
  19. Whittington R, Broderick GA, Arger P, et al. The effect of androgen deprivation on the early changes in prostate volume following transperineal ultrasound guided interstitial therapy for localized carcinoma of the prostate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;44:1107–1110
  20. Ash D, Al-Qaisieh B, Bottomley D, et al. The impact of hormone therapy on post-implant dosimetry and outcome following iodine-125 implant monotherapy for localised prostate cancer. Radiother Oncol. 2005;75:303–306
  21. Prestidge BR, Bice WS, Kiefer EJ, et al. Timing of computed tomography-based postimplant assessment following permanent transperineal prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998;40:1111–1115
  22. Waterman FM, Dicker AP. Impact of postimplant edema on V100 and D90 in prostate brachytherapy: Can implant quality be predicted on day 0?. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2002;53:610–621
  23. Chen Z, Deng J, Roberts K, et al. Potential impact of prostate edema on the dosimetry of permanent seed implants using the new 131Cs (model CS-1) seeds. Med Phys. 2006;33:968–975
  24. Shanahan TG, Mueller PW, Roszhart DA, et al. Image guided I 125 prostate brachytherapy with hybrid interactive Mick technique in the community setting: How does it compare?. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2004;3:209–215
  25. Yamada Y, Potters L, Zaider M, et al. Impact of intraoperative edema during transperineal permanent prostate brachytherapy on computer-optimized and preimplant planning techniques. Am J Clin Oncol. 2003;26:E130–E135
  26. Speight JL, Shinohara K, Pickett B, et al. Prostate volume change after radioactive seed implantation: Possible benefit of improved dose volume histogram with perioperative steroid. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;48:1461–1467
  27. Taussky D, Austen L, Toi A, et al. Sequential evaluation of prostate edema after permanent seed prostate brachytherapy using CT–MRI fusion. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;62:974–980

PII: S1538-4721(07)00245-0

doi: 10.1016/j.brachy.2007.08.006

Brachytherapy
Volume 6, Issue 4 , Pages 246-253 , October 2007

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution