Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Evaluation of intrafraction motion of the organs at risk in image-based brachytherapy of cervical cancer.
Simha, Vijai; Patel, Firuza Darius; Sharma, Suresh Chander; Rai, Bhavana; Oinam, Arun Singh; krishnatry, Rahul; Dhanireddy, Bhaswanth.
Affiliation
  • Simha V; Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India. Electronic address: vijaiaditya1985@gmail.com.
  • Patel FD; Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.
  • Sharma SC; Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.
  • Rai B; Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.
  • Oinam AS; Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.
  • krishnatry R; Department of Radiation Oncology, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India.
  • Dhanireddy B; Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research (PGIMER), Chandigarh, India.
Brachytherapy ; 13(6): 562-7, 2014.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25030951
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE/

INTRODUCTION:

To assess the variation in the doses received by the organs at risk (OARs) that can occur during treatment planning of cervical cancer by image-based brachytherapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS After intracavitary application, two sets of images-CT and MRI-were obtained. The two sets of images were fused together with respect to the applicator. Contouring was done separately on CT and MR images. Dose received by the OARs on CT images with respect to the plans made on the MR images was estimated and compared with those on the MR images.

RESULTS:

Although there was always a difference between the dose received by the OARs based on the CT and MRI contours, it was not significant for the bladder and rectum; 2 cc doses differed by 0.49 Gy (±0.44) p = 0.28 for the bladder and 0.30 Gy (±0.29) p = 0.16 for the rectum. The 1 cc and 0.1 cc differences were also not significant. However for the sigmoid colon, there was significant intrafraction variation in the 2 cc doses 0.61 (±0.6) p = 0.001, 1 cc doses 0.73 (±0.67) Gy p = 0.00, and 0.1 cc dose 0.97 (±0.93) Gy p = 0.009.

CONCLUSIONS:

The variation in the doses to the OARs must be considered while weighing target coverage against overdose to the OARs. Although not significant for the bladder and rectum, it was significant for the sigmoid colon. Estimated doses to OARs on the planning system may not be the same dose delivered at the time of treatment.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Brachytherapy / Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Organs at Risk Type of study: Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Female / Humans Language: En Journal: Brachytherapy Journal subject: RADIOTERAPIA Year: 2014 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Brachytherapy / Uterine Cervical Neoplasms / Organs at Risk Type of study: Etiology_studies / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Female / Humans Language: En Journal: Brachytherapy Journal subject: RADIOTERAPIA Year: 2014 Document type: Article