Cargando…
Comparison of three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer
PURPOSE: Three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer have been used since its use started in our hospital. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of the three different techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data of 305 prostate cancer patients who...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Termedia Publishing House
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4371061/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25829930 http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2015.48603 |
_version_ | 1782362975900794880 |
---|---|
author | Ishiyama, Hiromichi Satoh, Takefumi Sekiguchi, Akane Tabata, Ken-ichi Komori, Shouko Tsumura, Hideyasu Kawakami, Shogo Soda, Itaru Takenaka, Kouji Iwamura, Masatsugu Hayakawa, Kazushige |
author_facet | Ishiyama, Hiromichi Satoh, Takefumi Sekiguchi, Akane Tabata, Ken-ichi Komori, Shouko Tsumura, Hideyasu Kawakami, Shogo Soda, Itaru Takenaka, Kouji Iwamura, Masatsugu Hayakawa, Kazushige |
author_sort | Ishiyama, Hiromichi |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer have been used since its use started in our hospital. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of the three different techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data of 305 prostate cancer patients who underwent low-dose-rate seed implantation were retrospectively analyzed. Pre-plan technique (n = 27), intraoperative pre-plan technique (n = 86), and interactive plan technique (n = 192) were tried in chronological order. The prescribed dose was set at 145 Gy. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 66 months (range: 12-94 months). The 5-year biochemical control rate was 95.5% (pre-plan group: 100%, intraoperative pre-plan group: 90.7%, interactive plan group: 97.0%; p = 0.08). Dosimetric parameters were generally increased from the pre-plan group to the interactive group. The differences in some dosimetric parameters between the planning phase and the CT analysis were significantly reduced with the interactive plan compared to the other techniques. The interactive plan showed a significant reduction of the seed migration rate compared to the two other groups. Acute genitourinary toxicity, acute gastrointestinal toxicity, frequency, and urinary retention increased gradually from the pre-plan period to the interactive plan period. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in biochemical control among the three groups. Dose-volume parameters were increased from the pre-plan technique to the interactive plan technique. However, this may not necessarily be due to technical improvements, since dose escalation was started during the same period. Lower seed migration rates and the smaller differences between the planning phase and CT analysis with the interactive plan technique suggest the superiority of this technique to the two other techniques. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4371061 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Termedia Publishing House |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-43710612015-03-31 Comparison of three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer Ishiyama, Hiromichi Satoh, Takefumi Sekiguchi, Akane Tabata, Ken-ichi Komori, Shouko Tsumura, Hideyasu Kawakami, Shogo Soda, Itaru Takenaka, Kouji Iwamura, Masatsugu Hayakawa, Kazushige J Contemp Brachytherapy Original Paper PURPOSE: Three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer have been used since its use started in our hospital. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of the three different techniques. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data of 305 prostate cancer patients who underwent low-dose-rate seed implantation were retrospectively analyzed. Pre-plan technique (n = 27), intraoperative pre-plan technique (n = 86), and interactive plan technique (n = 192) were tried in chronological order. The prescribed dose was set at 145 Gy. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 66 months (range: 12-94 months). The 5-year biochemical control rate was 95.5% (pre-plan group: 100%, intraoperative pre-plan group: 90.7%, interactive plan group: 97.0%; p = 0.08). Dosimetric parameters were generally increased from the pre-plan group to the interactive group. The differences in some dosimetric parameters between the planning phase and the CT analysis were significantly reduced with the interactive plan compared to the other techniques. The interactive plan showed a significant reduction of the seed migration rate compared to the two other groups. Acute genitourinary toxicity, acute gastrointestinal toxicity, frequency, and urinary retention increased gradually from the pre-plan period to the interactive plan period. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in biochemical control among the three groups. Dose-volume parameters were increased from the pre-plan technique to the interactive plan technique. However, this may not necessarily be due to technical improvements, since dose escalation was started during the same period. Lower seed migration rates and the smaller differences between the planning phase and CT analysis with the interactive plan technique suggest the superiority of this technique to the two other techniques. Termedia Publishing House 2015-01-26 2015-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4371061/ /pubmed/25829930 http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2015.48603 Text en Copyright © 2015 Termedia http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Paper Ishiyama, Hiromichi Satoh, Takefumi Sekiguchi, Akane Tabata, Ken-ichi Komori, Shouko Tsumura, Hideyasu Kawakami, Shogo Soda, Itaru Takenaka, Kouji Iwamura, Masatsugu Hayakawa, Kazushige Comparison of three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer |
title | Comparison of three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer |
title_full | Comparison of three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer |
title_fullStr | Comparison of three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer |
title_short | Comparison of three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer |
title_sort | comparison of three different techniques of low-dose-rate seed implantation for prostate cancer |
topic | Original Paper |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4371061/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25829930 http://dx.doi.org/10.5114/jcb.2015.48603 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT ishiyamahiromichi comparisonofthreedifferenttechniquesoflowdoserateseedimplantationforprostatecancer AT satohtakefumi comparisonofthreedifferenttechniquesoflowdoserateseedimplantationforprostatecancer AT sekiguchiakane comparisonofthreedifferenttechniquesoflowdoserateseedimplantationforprostatecancer AT tabatakenichi comparisonofthreedifferenttechniquesoflowdoserateseedimplantationforprostatecancer AT komorishouko comparisonofthreedifferenttechniquesoflowdoserateseedimplantationforprostatecancer AT tsumurahideyasu comparisonofthreedifferenttechniquesoflowdoserateseedimplantationforprostatecancer AT kawakamishogo comparisonofthreedifferenttechniquesoflowdoserateseedimplantationforprostatecancer AT sodaitaru comparisonofthreedifferenttechniquesoflowdoserateseedimplantationforprostatecancer AT takenakakouji comparisonofthreedifferenttechniquesoflowdoserateseedimplantationforprostatecancer AT iwamuramasatsugu comparisonofthreedifferenttechniquesoflowdoserateseedimplantationforprostatecancer AT hayakawakazushige comparisonofthreedifferenttechniquesoflowdoserateseedimplantationforprostatecancer |