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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ishiyama, Hiromichi, Satoh, Takefumi, Sekiguchi, Akane, Tabata, Ken-ichi, Komori, Shouko, Tsumura, Hideyasu, Kawakami, Shogo, Soda, Itaru, Takenaka, Kouji, Iwamura, Masatsugu, Hayakawa, Kazushige
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