Cargando…
Visualising the urethra for prostate radiotherapy planning
INTRODUCTION: The prostatic urethra is an organ at risk for prostate radiotherapy with genitourinary toxicities a common side effect. Many external beam radiation therapy protocols call for urethral sparing, and with modulated radiotherapy techniques, the radiation dose distribution can be controlle...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8424315/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34028976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.485 |
_version_ | 1783749650609602560 |
---|---|
author | Richardson, Matthew Skehan, Kate Wilton, Lee Sams, Joshua Samuels, Justin Goodwin, Jonathan Greer, Peter Sridharan, Swetha Martin, Jarad |
author_facet | Richardson, Matthew Skehan, Kate Wilton, Lee Sams, Joshua Samuels, Justin Goodwin, Jonathan Greer, Peter Sridharan, Swetha Martin, Jarad |
author_sort | Richardson, Matthew |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: The prostatic urethra is an organ at risk for prostate radiotherapy with genitourinary toxicities a common side effect. Many external beam radiation therapy protocols call for urethral sparing, and with modulated radiotherapy techniques, the radiation dose distribution can be controlled so that maximum doses do not fall within the prostatic urethral volume. Whilst traditional diagnostic MRI sequences provide excellent delineation of the prostate, uncertainty often remains as to the true path of the urethra within the gland. This study aims to assess if a high‐resolution isotropic 3D T2 MRI series can reduce inter‐observer variability in urethral delineation for radiotherapy planning. METHODS: Five independent observers contoured the prostatic urethra for ten patients on three data sets; a 2 mm axial CT, a diagnostic 3 mm axial T2 TSE MRI and a 0.9 mm isotropic 3D T2 SPACE MRI. The observers were blinded from each other’s contours. A Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) score was calculated using the intersection and union of the five observer contours vs an expert reference contour for each data set. RESULTS: The mean DSC of the observer vs reference contours was 0.47 for CT, 0.62 for T2 TSE and 0.78 for T2 SPACE (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a 0.9 mm isotropic 3D T2 SPACE MRI for treatment planning provides improved urethral visualisation and can lead to a significant reduction in inter‐observer variation in prostatic urethral contouring. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8424315 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84243152021-09-13 Visualising the urethra for prostate radiotherapy planning Richardson, Matthew Skehan, Kate Wilton, Lee Sams, Joshua Samuels, Justin Goodwin, Jonathan Greer, Peter Sridharan, Swetha Martin, Jarad J Med Radiat Sci Original Articles INTRODUCTION: The prostatic urethra is an organ at risk for prostate radiotherapy with genitourinary toxicities a common side effect. Many external beam radiation therapy protocols call for urethral sparing, and with modulated radiotherapy techniques, the radiation dose distribution can be controlled so that maximum doses do not fall within the prostatic urethral volume. Whilst traditional diagnostic MRI sequences provide excellent delineation of the prostate, uncertainty often remains as to the true path of the urethra within the gland. This study aims to assess if a high‐resolution isotropic 3D T2 MRI series can reduce inter‐observer variability in urethral delineation for radiotherapy planning. METHODS: Five independent observers contoured the prostatic urethra for ten patients on three data sets; a 2 mm axial CT, a diagnostic 3 mm axial T2 TSE MRI and a 0.9 mm isotropic 3D T2 SPACE MRI. The observers were blinded from each other’s contours. A Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) score was calculated using the intersection and union of the five observer contours vs an expert reference contour for each data set. RESULTS: The mean DSC of the observer vs reference contours was 0.47 for CT, 0.62 for T2 TSE and 0.78 for T2 SPACE (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a 0.9 mm isotropic 3D T2 SPACE MRI for treatment planning provides improved urethral visualisation and can lead to a significant reduction in inter‐observer variation in prostatic urethral contouring. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-05-24 2021-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8424315/ /pubmed/34028976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.485 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Richardson, Matthew Skehan, Kate Wilton, Lee Sams, Joshua Samuels, Justin Goodwin, Jonathan Greer, Peter Sridharan, Swetha Martin, Jarad Visualising the urethra for prostate radiotherapy planning |
title | Visualising the urethra for prostate radiotherapy planning |
title_full | Visualising the urethra for prostate radiotherapy planning |
title_fullStr | Visualising the urethra for prostate radiotherapy planning |
title_full_unstemmed | Visualising the urethra for prostate radiotherapy planning |
title_short | Visualising the urethra for prostate radiotherapy planning |
title_sort | visualising the urethra for prostate radiotherapy planning |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8424315/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34028976 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.485 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT richardsonmatthew visualisingtheurethraforprostateradiotherapyplanning AT skehankate visualisingtheurethraforprostateradiotherapyplanning AT wiltonlee visualisingtheurethraforprostateradiotherapyplanning AT samsjoshua visualisingtheurethraforprostateradiotherapyplanning AT samuelsjustin visualisingtheurethraforprostateradiotherapyplanning AT goodwinjonathan visualisingtheurethraforprostateradiotherapyplanning AT greerpeter visualisingtheurethraforprostateradiotherapyplanning AT sridharanswetha visualisingtheurethraforprostateradiotherapyplanning AT martinjarad visualisingtheurethraforprostateradiotherapyplanning |