Prostate Postbrachytherapy Seed Distribution: Comparison of High-Resolution, Contrast-Enhanced, T1- and T2-Weighted Endorectal Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus Computed Tomography: Initial Experience
| Autor: | Long Ngo, Neil M. Rofsky, Renee Oismueller, Robert E. Lenkinski, B. Nicolas Bloch, Silvia Jaromi, Thomas H. Helbich, Irving D. Kaplan, Robert Hawliczek, Klaus Kubin |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2007 |
| Předmět: |
Male
Cancer Research medicine.medical_specialty medicine.medical_treatment Brachytherapy Contrast Media Periprostatic Prostate medicine Humans Dosimetry Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging Radiation Urinary bladder medicine.diagnostic_test business.industry Prostatic Neoplasms Radiotherapy Dosage Magnetic resonance imaging Neurovascular bundle Magnetic Resonance Imaging medicine.anatomical_structure Oncology Radiology Tomography X-Ray Computed business Nuclear medicine Prostate brachytherapy |
| Zdroj: | International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics. 69:70-78 |
| ISSN: | 0360-3016 |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.02.039 |
| Popis: | Purpose: To compare contrast-enhanced, T1-weighted, three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging (CEMR) and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (T2MR) with computed tomography (CT) for prostate brachytherapy seed location for dosimetric calculations. Methods and Materials: Postbrachytherapy prostate MRI was performed on a 1.5 Tesla unit with combined surface and endorectal coils in 13 patients. Both CEMR and T2MR used a section thickness of 3 mm. Spiral CT used a section thickness of 5 mm with a pitch factor of 1.5. All images were obtained in the transverse plane. Two readers using CT and MR imaging assessed brachytherapy seed distribution independently. The dependency of data read by both readers for a specific subject was assessed with a linear mixed effects model. Results: The mean percentage (± standard deviation) values of the readers for seed detection and location are presented. Of 1205 implanted seeds, CEMR, T2MR, and CT detected 91.5% ± 4.8%, 78.5% ± 8.5%, and 96.1% ± 2.3%, respectively, with 11.8% ± 4.5%, 8.5% ± 3.5%, 1.9% ± 1.0% extracapsular, respectively. Assignment to periprostatic structures was not possible with CT. Periprostatic seed assignments for CEMR and T2MR, respectively, were as follows: neurovascular bundle, 3.5% ± 1.6% and 2.1% ± 0.9%; seminal vesicles, 0.9% ± 1.8% and 0.3% ± 0.7%; periurethral, 7.1% ± 3.3% and 5.8% ± 2.9%; penile bulb, 0.6% ± 0.8% and 0.3% ± 0.6%; Denonvillier's Fascia/rectal wall, 0.5% ± 0.6% and 0%; and urinary bladder, 0.1% ± 0.3% and 0%. Data dependency analysis showed statistical significance for the type of imaging but not for reader identification. Conclusion: Both enumeration and localization of implanted seeds are readily accomplished with CEMR. Calculations with MRI dosimetry do not require CT data. Dose determinations to specific extracapsular sites can be obtained with MRI but not with CT. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|