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
. 2014 Jun;190(6):538-45.
doi: 10.1007/s00066-014-0614-4. Epub 2014 Mar 4.

Robotic radiosurgery as an alternative to brachytherapy for cervical cancer patients

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Robotic radiosurgery as an alternative to brachytherapy for cervical cancer patients

Oliver Neumann et al. Strahlenther Onkol. 2014 Jun.

Abstract

Background and purpose: To compare MRI-guided brachytherapy (BT) and two different dose prescriptions for robotic radiosurgery (RRS) in locally advanced cervical cancer.

Methods and materials: Eleven patients with FIGO stage IIB-IIIB cervical cancer underwent RRS instead of BT for various reasons. A total dose of 30 Gy was administered in five fractions. The maximum dose was chosen such that the prescribed dose was 70 % of the maximum dose (RRS70). To simulate BT more closely, additional plan calculations were carried out for a higher maximum dose with the same enclosing dose of 30 Gy being now 25 % of the maximum dose (RRS25). BT plans were calculated for the same patients (BTRRS). Finally, the resulting three sets of treatment plans were compared with 38 other patients treated with MRI-guided BT and the same dose prescription (BTref). Plan comparisons were performed based on DVH parameters with regard to target coverage (V100), conformation number (CN), and sparing of the organs at risk (OARs).

Results: The best coverage of V100 = 100 ± 0 % was obtained with RRS25, followed by RRS70 with 97.1 ± 2.7 %, BTref with 90.9 ± 8.9 %, and the intraindividual BTRRS with 80.6 ± 6.4 %. The sparing of OARs was associated with D0.1 cc, D2 cc, and D5 cc to the rectum, sigmoid, and bladder walls. OAR doses were compliant with the GEC-ESTRO guidelines and comparable among RRS70, RRS25, BTRRS, and BTref. By contrast, RRS25 could not fulfill these guidelines, exceeding considerably the tolerable dose constraints for the walls of the critical OARs.

Conclusion: Despite of the excellent coverage and higher maximum dose, the unacceptably high exposure to the OARs disqualified RRS25 as an alternative for BT in cervical cancer patients. By contrast, RRS70 offered the best protection for the OARs, comparable to BT, and even better target coverage and conformity than BT.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Strahlenther Onkol. 2013 Nov;189(11):951-6 - PubMed
    1. Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Mar;120(3):404-12 - PubMed
    1. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2010 Oct;9(5):509-14 - PubMed
    1. Front Oncol. 2012 Mar 21;2:25 - PubMed
    1. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005 May 1;62(1):293-5; author reply 295-6 - PubMed

Publication types