Paper detail

Dosimetric equivalence of non-standard high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy catheter patterns

Purpose: To determine whether alternative HDR prostate brachytherapy catheter patterns can result in improved dose distributions while providing better access and reducing trauma. Methods: Prostate HDR brachytherapy uses a grid of parallel needle positions to guide the catheter insertion. This geometry does not easily allow the physician to avoid piercing the critical structures near the penile bulb nor does it provide position flexibility in the case of pubic arch interference. On CT data from ten previously-treated patients new catheters were digitized following three catheter patterns: conical, bi-conical, and fireworks. The conical patterns were used to accommodate a robotic delivery using a single entry point. The bi-conical and fireworks patterns were specifically designed to avoid the critical structures near the penile bulb. For each catheter distribution, a plan was optimized with the inverse planning algorithm, IPSA, and compared with the plan used for treatment. Irrelevant of catheter geometry, a plan must fulfill the RTOG-0321 dose criteria for target dose coverage. Results: Thirty plans from ten patients were optimized. All non-standard patterns fulfilled the RTOG criteria when the clinical plan did. In some cases, the dose distribution was improved by better sparing the organs-at-risk. Conclusion: Alternative catheter patterns can provide the physician with additional ways to treat patients previously considered unsuited for brachytherapy treatment (pubic arch interference) and facilitate robotic guidance of catheter insertion. In addition, alternative catheter patterns may decrease toxicity by avoidance of the critical structures near the penile bulb while still fulfilling the RTOG criteria.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.