Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The impact of trainee involvement on outcomes in low-dose-rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer.
Shaikh, Talha; Wang, Lora; Ruth, Karen; Hallman, Mark; Chen, David Y; Greenberg, Richard E; Li, Jinsheng; Crawford, Kevin; Horwitz, Eric M.
Afiliação
  • Shaikh T; Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Wang L; Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Ruth K; Department of Biostatistics, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Hallman M; Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Chen DY; Department of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Greenberg RE; Department of Surgical Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Li J; Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Crawford K; Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA.
  • Horwitz EM; Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA. Electronic address: eric.horwitz@fccc.edu.
Brachytherapy ; 15(2): 156-62, 2016.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26832675
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

To determine the impact of fellow, resident, or medical student (MS) involvement on outcomes in patients undergoing permanent (125)I prostate seed implant. METHODS AND MATERIALS The study population consisted of men with clinically localized low/intermediate-risk prostate cancer treated with low-dose-rate permanent interstitial brachytherapy. Cases were stratified according to resident, fellow, MS, or attending involvement. Outcomes were compared using analysis of variance, logistic regression, and log rank tests.

RESULTS:

A total of 291 patients were evaluated. Fellows, residents, and MS were involved in 47 (16.2%), 231 (79.4%), and 34 (11.7%) cases, respectively. Thirteen (4.4%) cases were completed by an attending physician alone. There was no difference in freedom from biochemical failure when comparing the resident, fellow, or attending alone groups (p = 0.10). There was no difference in V100 (volume of the prostate receiving 100% of the prescription dose) outcomes when comparing resident cases to fellow cases (p = 0.72) or attending alone cases (p = 0.78). There was no difference in D90 (minimum dose covering 90% of the postimplant volume) outcomes when comparing resident cases to fellow cases (p = 0.74) or attending alone cases (p = 0.58). When examining treatment toxicity, fellow cases had higher rates of acute Grade 2 + GU toxicity (p = 0.028). With the exception of higher urethra D90 among PGY 2-3 cases (p = 0.02), dosimetric outcomes were similar to cases with PGY 4-5 resident participation. There was no difference in outcomes for cases with and without MS participation.

CONCLUSIONS:

Interstitial prostate seed implants can be safely performed by trainees with appropriate supervision. Hands-on brachytherapy training is effective and feasible for trainees.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Temas: ECOS / Aspectos_gerais Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Próstata / Braquiterapia / Estágio Clínico / Competência Clínica / Bolsas de Estudo / Internato e Residência Limite: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Brachytherapy Assunto da revista: RADIOTERAPIA Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Panamá

Texto completo: 1 Temas: ECOS / Aspectos_gerais Bases de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Próstata / Braquiterapia / Estágio Clínico / Competência Clínica / Bolsas de Estudo / Internato e Residência Limite: Aged / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Brachytherapy Assunto da revista: RADIOTERAPIA Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Panamá