eISSN: 2081-2841
ISSN: 1689-832X
Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy
Current Issue Archive Supplements Articles in Press Journal Information Aims and Scope Editorial Office Editorial Board Register as Author Register as Reviewer Instructions for Authors Abstracting and indexing Subscription Advertising Information Links
Editorial System
Submit your Manuscript
SCImago Journal & Country Rank
Search
4/2019
vol. 11
 
Share:
Send email
Share:
abstract:
Original paper

Addition of magnetic resonance imaging to real time trans-rectal ultrasound-based treatment planning for prostate implants

Michael Petronek
1
,
Salim Balik
2
,
Andrei Purysko
3
,
Eric Klein
4
,
Jay Ciezki
2
,
Allan Wilkinson
2

  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, United States
  2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
  3. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
  4. Department of Urology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States
J Contemp Brachytherapy 2019; 11, 4: 361–369
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2019.87189
Online publish date: 2019/08/22
View full text Get citation
 
Purpose
The greater soft tissue contrast of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) allows improved accuracy in prostate contouring compared to transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) and helps in identifying specific regions within the prostate. This study attempts to evaluate the potential benefit of MRI-TRUS fusion in treatment planning for more accurate prostate contouring and tumor dose escalation.

Material and methods
14 patients with previous MRI-guided prostate biopsy and an low-dose-rate (LDR) permanent prostate seed implant have been selected. The prostate and tumor (5 patients) were contoured on the MRI images by a radiologist. The prostate was also contoured on TRUS images during LDR procedure together by a urologist and radiation oncologist. MRI and TRUS images were rigidly fused to compare prostate contours in MRI and TRUS. Prostate was then re-contoured by the radiation oncologist using this fusion. Moreover, V100, V150, and D90 differences were evaluated for localized tumor compared to prostate with negative values indicating cold tumor regions. These cases were re-planned to simulate dose escalation.

Results
The prostate volume was contoured 8 ±10% smaller in TRUS images, compared to MRI images. The mean percent difference in tumor (compared to prostate) V100 was 0.3 ±–0.4%, V150 was –0.7 ±–24.8%, and D90 was 0.2 ±–12.1%. For the posteriorly located tumors (2 cases), V100 was 0.0 ±–0.3%, D90 was 9.5 ±–3.0%, and V150 was 26.1 ±–5.4%. For anteriorly located tumors (3 cases), V100 was 0.4 ±–0.4%, D90 was –6.0 ±–11.9%, and V150 was –18.5 ±–14.4% (became 15.6 ±14.6% after re-plan).

Conclusions
The MRI-TRUS image fusion is a feasible tool for the visualization of the prostate gland, particularly at the apex and base of the gland. Tumor identification presents the potential for dose escalation using fusion, especially for anteriorly located tumors.

keywords:

prostate, seed implant, LDR, TRUS, MRI, fusion

  
Termedia
About us Contact
Copyright notice Privacy policy Advertising policy Contact us
Quick links
Journals Books eBooks Events
© 2024 Termedia Sp. z o.o.
Developed by Bentus.