Search

Investigate the impact on prostate orientation caused by use and removal of a Foley catheter, and the dosimetric impact on men prospectively treated with prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).Twenty-two men underwent a CT simulation with a Foley in place (FCT), followed immediately by a second treatment planning simulation without the Foley (TPCT). The change in prostate orientation was determined by rigid registration of three implanted transponders between FCT and TPCT and compared to measured orientation changes during treatment. The impact on treatment planning and delivery was investigated by analyzing the measured rotations during treatment relative to both CT scans, and introducing rotations of ±15° in the treatment plan to determine the maximum impact of allowed rotations.Removing the Foley caused a statistically significant prostate rotation (P 0.0028) compared to normal biological motion in 60% of patients. The largest change in rotation due to removing a Foley occurs about the left-right axis (tilt) which has a standard deviation two to five times larger than changes in rotation about the Sup-Inf (roll) and Ant-Post (yaw) axes. The change in tilt due to removing a Foley for prone and supine patients was -1.1° ± 6.0° and 0.3° ± 7.4°, showing no strong directional bias. The average tilt during treatment was -1.6° ± 7.1° compared to the TPCT and would have been -2.0° ± 7.1° had the FCT been used as the reference. The TPCT was a better or equivalent representation of prostate tilt in 82% of patients, vs 50% had the FCT been used for treatment planning. However, 92.7% of fractions would still have been within the ±15° rotation limit if only the FCT were used for treatment planning. When rotated ±15°, urethra VRemoving a Foley catheter can cause large prostate rotations. There does not appear to be a clear dosimetric benefit to obtaining the CT scan with a Foley catheter to define the urethra given the changes in urethral position from removing the Foley catheter. If urethral sparing is desired without the use of a Foley, utilization of an MRI to define the urethra may be necessary, or a pseudo-urethral planning organ at risk volume (PRV) may be used to limit dosimetric hot spots.

After radiosurgery of malignant tumors, it can be difficult to discriminate between transient treatment effects, radiation necrosis, and tumor progression on post-treatment imaging. Misinterpretation of an enlarging lesion may lead to inappropriate treatment and contribute to disagreements about treatment efficacy. In an effort to clarify this problem, we reviewed our experience with interpreting post-radiosurgical imaging in patients with malignant primary and secondary brain tumors. We reviewed results of radiosurgery of 30 malignant gliomas and 35 metastatic brain tumors with minimum follow up of 1 year or until death. Of 30 gliomas, 73% were larger a mean of 13 weeks after radiosurgery. Of 35 metatstatic tumors, 22% were larger a mean of 10 weeks after radiosurgery. Eleven had 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) of enlarging lesions. Eight showed increased activity with respect to brain; three decreased activity. Of the eight, six predicted incorrectly based upon the patients' subsequent courses (all alive, mean follow up of 27 months), and two correctly, with the patients dying from the imaged lesions 8 and 13 months later. Of the three with FDG uptake less than brain, one patient was alive with 32 weeks of follow up, and two patients died from the imaged lesion 13 and 21 months later. Radiographic enlargement after radiosurgery is common, especially for gliomas. Physicians caring for these patients should be aware of this phenomenon and be cautious in interpreting post-treatment images. MRI appearance may be useful for metastases. FDG-PET seems unreliable. Further evaluation of Tl-201 and HMPAO SPECT or MRS is warranted.

In this paper we describe the clinical use of an in-house mutual information-based image registration system for improving target volume definition in conformal radiotherapy treatment planning. This system enables a clinician to delineate clinical and anatomic structures on magnetic resonance and nuclear medicine imaging studies and have these structures geometrically mapped to the x-ray CT study used for treatment planning. This system requires very little user interaction and can accommodate a wide range of anatomic sites. These factors combined with consistent accuracy at the sub-voxel to voxel level have improved the overall quality and physician confidence in the delineation of target volumes and surrounding healthy tissues.