Bipolar transurethral resection in saline--an alternative surgical treatment for bladder outlet obstruction?

PURPOSE: The transurethral resection in saline system uses bipolar energy for transurethral prostate resection, thus, avoiding the need for glycine irrigation and its associated complications. We compared the clinical efficacy and safety of bipolar transurethral resection in saline and of monopolar transurethral prostate resection for symptomatic benign prostate hyperplasia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2005 to June 2006, 238 consecutive patients with symptomatic benign prostate hyperplasia were randomized into a prospective, controlled trial comparing the 2 treatment modalities. Patient demographics, operative time, hospital stay and complications were noted. Serum hemoglobin and electrolytes were determined in all patients immediately before and after the endoscopic procedure. RESULTS: During 18 months 120 patients were randomized to the conventional transurethral prostate resection group and 118 were randomized to the transurethral resection in saline group. Patient profiles, weight of resected prostatic tissue and duration of hospitalization were similar in the 2 groups. The decrease in serum sodium and serum chloride was statistically significantly greater in the transurethral prostate resection group than in the transurethral resection in saline group (each p = 0.05). The transurethral resection in saline procedure required significantly more time (mean 56 vs 44 minutes, p <0.01). There was 1 case (0.8%) of transurethral resection syndrome in the transurethral prostate resection group but none in the transurethral resection in saline group. Postoperative bleeding did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. Clot retention was observed in 6 (5%) and 4 patients (3%) in the transurethral prostate resection and transurethral resection in saline group, respectively. Two repeat interventions were required in the transurethral prostate resection group. CONCLUSIONS: The bipolar transurethral resection in saline system is as efficacious as monopolar transurethral prostate resection but it is safer than the latter because of the lesser decrease in postoperative hypernatremia and the smaller risk of transurethral resection syndrome. However, probably due to technical reasons, transurethral resection in saline operative time is significantly longer.

X-ray-assisted positioning of patients treated by conformal arc radiotherapy for prostate cancer: comparison of setup accuracy using implanted markers versus bony structures.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare setup accuracy of NovalisBody stereoscopic X-ray positioning using implanted markers in the prostate vs. bony structures in patients treated with dynamic conformal arc radiotherapy for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Random and systematic setup errors (RE and SE) of the isocenter with regard to the center of gravity of three fiducial markers were measured by means of orthogonal verification films in 120 treatment sessions in 12 patients. Positioning was performed using NovalisBody semiautomated marker fusion. The results were compared with a control group of 261 measurements in 15 patients who were positioned with NovalisBody automated bone fusion. In addition, interfraction and intrafraction prostate motion was registered in the patients with implanted markers. RESULTS: Marker-based X-ray positioning resulted in a reduction of RE as well as SE in the anteroposterior, craniocaudal, and left-right directions compared with those in the control group. The interfraction prostate displacements with regard to the bony pelvis that could be avoided by marker positioning ranged between 1.6 and 2.8 mm for RE and between 1.3 and 4.3 mm for SE. Intrafraction random and systematic prostate movements ranged between 1.4 and 2.4 mm and between 0.8 and 1.3 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: The problem of interfraction prostate motion can be solved by using implanted markers. In addition, the NovalisBody X-ray system performs more accurately with markers compared with bone fusion. Intrafraction organ motion has become the limiting factor for margin reduction around the clinical target volume.

Late toxicity following conventional radiotherapy for prostate cancer: analysis of the EORTC trial 22863.

Late toxicity and other serious adverse events (SAE) were analysed in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) trial 22863. The study evaluated the value of adjuvant endocrine treatment for locally advanced prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy. From 1987 to 1995, 415 patients were randomised. There was long-term toxicity information for 377 patients (91%). Median age was 70 years (range 50-80 years). Median follow-up for late toxicity was 42 months (range 3-136 months). Toxicity was graded according to a modified Radiotherapy and Oncology Group (RTOG) scale. Other late SAE, that was not classified as severe treatment toxicity, but were still life-threatening, were also assessed. There were 72 patients with grade 2, 10 patients with grade 3 and 4 patients with grade 4 toxicity. There were 20 patients with other late SAE, who were grouped according to their relationship to treatment; likely related (n = 1), unrelated (n = 7) and not assessable (n = 12). Although four treatment-related deaths (1%) occurred, grade 3 or 4 late complications were less than 5%.

Clinical use of stereoscopic X-ray positioning of patients treated with conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate accuracy and time requirements of a stereoscopic X-ray-based positioning system in patients receiving conformal radiotherapy to the prostate. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Setup errors of the isocenter with regard to the bony pelvis were measured by means of orthogonal verification films and compared to conventional positioning (using skin drawings and lasers) and infrared marker (IR) based positioning in each of 261 treatments. In each direction, the random error represents the standard deviation and the systematic error the absolute value of the mean position. Time measurements were done in 75 treatments. RESULTS: Random errors with the X-ray positioning system in the anteroposterior (AP), lateral, and longitudinal direction were (average +/- 1 standard deviation) 2 +/- 0.6 mm, 1.7 +/- 0.6 mm, and 2.4 +/- 0.7 mm. The corresponding values of conventional as well as IR positioning were significantly higher (p < 0.01). Systematic errors for X-ray positioning were 1.1 +/- 1.2 mm AP, 0.6 +/- 0.5 mm laterally, and 1.5 +/- 1.6 mm longitudinally. Conventional and IR marker-based positioning showed significantly larger systematic errors AP and laterally, but longitudinally, the difference was not significant. Depending on the axis looked at, errors of >or=5 mm occurred in 2%-14% of treatments after X-ray positioning, 13%-29% using IR markers, and 28%-53% with conventional positioning. Total linac time for one treatment session was 14 min 51 s +/- 4 min 18 s, half of which was used for the X-ray-assisted positioning procedure. CONCLUSION: X-ray-assisted patient positioning significantly improves setup accuracy, at the cost of an increased treatment time.

Initial clinical experience with infrared-reflecting skin markers in the positioning of patients treated by conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: To evaluate an infrared (IR) marker-based positioning system in patients receiving conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: During 553 treatments, the ability of the IR system to automatically position the isocenter was recorded. Setup errors were measured by means of orthogonal verification films and compared to conventional positioning (using skin drawings and lasers) in 184 treatments. RESULTS: The standard deviation of anteroposterior (AP) and lateral setup errors was significantly reduced with IR marker positioning compared to conventional: 2 vs. 4.8 mm AP (p < 0.01) and 1.6 vs. 3.5 mm laterally (p < 0.01). Longitudinally, the difference was not significant (3.5 vs. 3.0 mm). Systematic errors were on the average smaller AP and laterally for the IR method: 4.1 vs. 7.8 mm AP (p = 0.01) and 3.1 vs. 5.6 mm lateral (p = 0.07). Longitudinally, the IR system resulted in somewhat larger systematic errors: 5.0 vs. 3.4 mm for conventional positioning (p = 0.03). The use of an off-line correction protocol, based on the average deviation measured over the first four fractions, allowed virtual elimination of systematic errors. Inability of the IR system to correctly locate the markers, leading to an executional failure, occurred in 21% of 553 fractions. CONCLUSION: IR marker-assisted patient positioning significantly improves setup accuracy along the AP and lateral axes. Executional failures need to be reduced.