Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T20:36:34.113Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Variation in applicator positions during interfraction high-dose rate brachytherapy in carcinoma cervix: dosimetric evaluation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2013

Kamlesh Passi ,
Lalit M. Aggarwal ,
Rajesh Vashistha ,
Bikramjit Singh ,
Parveen Kaur ,
Sureshchandra J. Gupta  and
Than S. Kehwar
Kamlesh Passi
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Oswal Cancer Hospital, Ludhiana (Pb), India
Lalit M. Aggarwal
Affiliation:
Department of Radiotherapy & Radiation Medicine, Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi (UP), India
Rajesh Vashistha
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, Max Superspeciality Hospital, Bathinda (Pb), India
Bikramjit Singh
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Oswal Cancer Hospital, Ludhiana (Pb), India
Parveen Kaur
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, MD Oswal Cancer Hospital, Ludhiana (Pb), India
Sureshchandra J. Gupta
Affiliation:
Department of Physics, University of Mumbai (MH), India
Than S. Kehwar*
Affiliation:
Department of Radiation Oncology, UPMC Cancer Centers, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
*
Correspondence to: Than S. Kehwar, Professor of Radiology, Division of Radiation Oncology, Penn State Hershey Cancer Institute, Penn State Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, 500 University Dr., CH63, Hershey, PA 17033, USA. Tel: +717-531-1523. Fax: +717-531-0446. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Purpose

This study was designed to study the variations in different geometrical and dosimetric parameters.

Materials and methods

In this study, two groups comprises 21 and 28 patients, who were treated with 9·5 Gy × 2 Fx and 7·5 Gy × 3 Fx, respectively, using microselectron high-dose rate (HDR) remote control unit. All patients were analysed using orthogonal radiographs to evaluate variations in different parameters.

Results

Variations in different parameters are more in Group II patients than in Group I patients, which show that the variation in geometrical and dosimetrical parameters increases with increasing HDR number of fractions.

Conclusion

In the reporting of an outcome of multiple fractionation of HDR treatments resultant dosimetric parameters must be evaluated and must be used for clinical interpretation.

Keywords

carcinoma of cervixHDR brachytherapyICRU 38 report
Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 12 , Issue 4 , December 2013 , pp. 305 - 317
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.King, G C, Bloomer, W D, Kalnicki, Set al. Point dose variations with time during traditional brachytherapy for cervical carcinoma. Med Dosim 2000; 25: 77–80.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Thomadsen, B R, Shahabi, S, Stitt, J Aet al. High dose rate intracavitary brachytherapy for carcinoma of the cervix: the Madison system: II Procedural and physical considerations. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1992; 24: 349–357.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.ICRU International Commission of Radiation Units and Measurements. Dose and Volume Specifications for reporting intracavitary therapy in gynaecology, ICRU report 38, Bethesda, MD, 1985.Google Scholar
4.Potish, R A, Gerbi, B J. Role of point A in the era of computerized dosimetry. Radiology 1986; 158: 827–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Bahena, J H, Martinez, A, Yan, Det al. Spatial reproducibility of the ring and tandem high-dose rate cervix applicator. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998; 41: 13–19.Google ScholarPubMed
6.Datta, N R, Kumar, S, Das, K J, Pandey, C M, Halder, S, Ayyagari, S. Variations of intracavitary applicator geometry during multiple HDR brachytherapy insertions in carcinoma cervix and its influence on reporting as per ICRU report 38. Radiother Oncol 2001; 60: 15–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Grigsby, P W, Georgiou, A, Williamson, J F, Perez, CA. Grigsby anatomic variation of gynecologic brachytherapy prescription points. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993; 27: 725–729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Kim, R Y, Meyer, J T, Plott, W Eet al. Major geometric variations between multiple high-dose-rate applications of brachytherapy in cancer of the cervix: frequency and types of variation. Radiology 1995; 195: 419–422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Kim, R Y, Meyer, J T, Spencer, S A, Meredith, R F, Jennelle, R L, Salter, M M. Major geometric variations between intracavitary applications in carcinoma of the cervix: high dose rate vs low dose rate. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1996; 35: 1035–1038.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Corn, B W, Galvin, J M, Soffen, E M, Henze, G, Schwaibold, F. Positional stability of sources during low-dose-rate brachytherapy for cervical carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1993; 26: 513–518.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Jones, D A, Notley, H M, Hunter, R D. Geometry adopted by Manchester radium applicators and Selectron after loading applicators in intracavitary treatment for carcinoma cervix uteri. Br J Radiol 1987; 60: 481–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Hellebust, T P, Dale, E, Skjonsberg, A, Olsen, D R. Inter fraction variations in rectum and bladder volumes and dose distributions during high dose rate brachytherapy treatment of the uterine cervix investigated by repetitive CT-examinations. Radiother Oncol 2001; 60: 273–280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Hoskin, P J, Cook, M, Bouscale, D, Cansdale, J. Changes in applicator position with fractionated high dose rate gynecological brachytherapy. Radiother Oncol 1996; 40: 59–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Elhanafy, O A, Das, R K, Paliwal, B Ret al. Anatomic variation of prescription points and treatment volume with fractionated high-dose rate gynecological brachytherapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2002; 3: 1–5.Google ScholarPubMed
15.Garipagaoglu, M, Tuncel, N, Dalmaz, M Get al. Changes in applicator positions and dose distribution between high dose rate brachytherapy fractions in cervix carcinoma patients receiving definitive radiotherapy. Br J Radiol 2006; 79: 504–509.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed