Dosimetric evaluation of image based brachytherapy using tandem ovoid and tandem ring applicators

被引:9
作者
Rangarajan, Ramya [1 ]
机构
[1] Govt Royapettah Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, Madras, Tamil Nadu, India
关键词
Intracavitary brachytherapy; Tandem-ovoid; Tandem-ring;
D O I
10.1016/j.rpor.2017.12.006
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Aim: The aim of the study is to evaluate the differences in dosimetry between tandem-ovoid and tandem-ring gynaecologic brachytherapy applicators in image based brachytherapy. Background: Traditionally, tandem ovoid applicators were used to deliver dose to tumor in intracavitary brachytherapy. Tandem-ring, tandem-cylinder and hybrid intracavitary, interstitial applicators are also used nowadays in cervical cancer brachytherapy. Methods and materials: 100 CT datasets of cervical cancer patients (stage IB2 - IIIB) receiving HDR application (50 tandem-ovoid and 50 tandem-ring) were studied. Brachytherapy was delivered using a CT-MRI compatible tandem-ovoid (50 patients) and a tandem-ring applicator (50 patients). DVHs were calculated and D2cc was recorded for the bladder and rectum and compared with the corresponding ICRU point doses. The point B dose, the treated volume, high dose volume and the treatment time were recorded and compared for the two applicators. Results: The mean D2cc of the bladder with TR applicator was 6.746 Gy. TO applicator delivered a mean D2cc of 7.160 Gy to the bladder. The mean ICRU bladder points were 5.60 and 5.63 Gy for TR and TO applicator, respectively. The mean D2cc of the rectum was 4.04 Gy and 4.79 Gy for TR and TO applicators, respectively. The corresponding ICRU point doses were 5.10 Gy and 5.66 Gy, respectively. Conclusions: The results indicate that the OAR doses assessed by DVH criteria were higher than ICRU point doses for the bladder with both tandem-ovoid and tandem-ring applicators whereas DVH based dose was lower than ICRU dose for the rectum. The point B dose, the treated volume and high dose volume was found to be slightly higher with the tandem ovoid applicator. The mean D2cc dose for the bladder and rectum was lower with tandem ring applicators. The clinical implication of the above dosimetric differences needs to be evaluated further. (C) 2018 Greater Poland Cancer Centre. Published by Elsevier Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:57 / 60
页数:4
相关论文
共 11 条
  • [1] Bahena JH, 1998, INT J RADIAT ONCOL, V41, P13
  • [2] Ebruli C, 2007, TUMORI, V93, P432
  • [3] Erickson B, 2000, J BRACHYTHERAPY INT, V16, P131
  • [4] Hunte A, 2008, BRACHYTHERAPY, V7, P97
  • [5] DOSIMETRIC COMPARISON OF TANDEM AND OVOIDS VS. TANDEM AND RING FOR INTRACAVITARY GYNECOLOGIC APPLICATIONS
    Levin, Daphne
    Menhel, Janna
    Rabin, Tanya
    Pfeffer, M. Raphael
    Symon, Zvi
    [J]. MEDICAL DOSIMETRY, 2008, 33 (04) : 315 - 320
  • [6] Short-term clinical outcome and dosimetric comparison of tandem and ring versus tandem and ovoids intracavitary applicators
    Ma, John K.
    Mourad, Waleed F.
    Allbright, Robert
    Packianathan, Satyaseelan
    Harrell, Leslie M.
    Chinchar, Edmund
    Nguyen, Alex
    Vijayakumar, Srinivasan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CONTEMPORARY BRACHYTHERAPY, 2015, 7 (03) : 218 - 223
  • [7] The American Brachytherapy Society recommendations for high-dose-rate brachytherapy for carcinoma of the cervix
    Nag, S
    Erickson, B
    Thomadsen, E
    Orton, C
    Demanes, JD
    Petereit, D
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2000, 48 (01): : 201 - 211
  • [8] Nair M T, 1995, Med Dosim, V20, P201, DOI 10.1016/0958-3947(95)00019-S
  • [9] Clinical Impact of Computed Tomography-based Image-guided Brachytherapy for Cervix Cancer using the Tandem-ring Applicator - the Addenbrooke's Experience
    Tan, L. T.
    Coles, C. E.
    Hart, C.
    Tait, E.
    [J]. CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2009, 21 (03) : 175 - 182
  • [10] Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging-based contouring in cervical cancer brachytherapy:: Results of a prospective trial and preliminary guidelines for standardized contours
    Viswanathan, Akila N.
    Dimopoulos, Johannes
    Kirisits, Christian
    Berger, Daniel
    Potter, Richard
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2007, 68 (02): : 491 - 498