Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2010 Jul-Sep;9(3):219-23.
doi: 10.1016/j.brachy.2009.09.007. Epub 2010 Feb 1.

Differences between intraoperative ultrasound-based dosimetry and postoperative computed tomography-based dosimetry for permanent interstitial prostate brachytherapy

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Differences between intraoperative ultrasound-based dosimetry and postoperative computed tomography-based dosimetry for permanent interstitial prostate brachytherapy

Hiromichi Ishiyama et al. Brachytherapy. 2010 Jul-Sep.

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the results of intraoperative ultrasound (US)-based dosimetry with those of postimplant computed tomography (CT)-based dosimetry after (125)I prostate brachytherapy.

Methods and materials: Subjects comprised 160 patients who underwent prostate brachytherapy using (125)I seed implants. Prescribed dose was set as 145 Gy to the periphery of the prostate. Implantation was performed using an intraoperative interactive technique. Postimplant dosimetry was performed on Days 1 and 30 after implantation using CT. Dosimetric results for the prostate, urethra, and rectum were compared among intraoperative US and CT on Day 1 (CT(1)) and Day 30 (CT(30)).

Results: Mean minimal dose received by 90% of prostate volume was 133.7%, 115.6%, and 125.8% of the prescribed dose on US, CT(1), and CT(30), respectively: This value temporarily decreased on Day 1 and increased on Day 30. Other parameters for the prostate and urethra showed similar trends. Conversely, mean rectal volume receiving 100% of the prescribed dose was 0.69, 0.46, and 1.02 mL on US, CT(1), and CT(30), respectively. Rectal parameters tended to be underestimated on US relative to CT(30)-based dosimetry. A positive linear relationship was identified between US and CT observations for every prostate parameter and the dose covering 30% of the urethra.

Conclusions: Our results demonstrate significant differences between dosimetric parameters obtained by US, CT(1), and CT(30). However, significant correlations also exist between US and CT, at least in prostate and urethral parameters. Clarification of the degrees of difference might make US planning more feasible.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types