Search

Copyright of Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Sciences is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Journal of Medical Imaging & Radiation Sciences is the property of Elsevier B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Administration of contrast medium (CM) is an important image quality factor in computed tomography (CT) of the chest. There is no clear evidence or guidelines on CM strategies for chest CT, thus a consensus approach is needed. Purpose: To survey the potential impact on differences in chest CT protocols, with emphasis on strategies for the administration of CM. Material and Methods: A total of 170 respondents were included in this survey, which used two different approaches: (i) an online survey was sent to the members of the European Society of Thoracic Imaging (ESTI); and (ii) an email requesting a copy of their CT protocol was sent to all hospitals in Norway, and university hospitals in Sweden and Denmark. The survey focused on factors affecting CM protocols and enhancement in chest CT. Results: The overall response rate was 24% (n = 170): 76% of the respondents used a CM concentration of ≥350 mgI/mL; 52% of the respondents used a fixed CM volume strategy. Fixed strategies for injection rate and delay were also the most common approach, practiced by 73% and 57% of the respondents, respectively. The fixed delay was in the range of 20–90 s. Of the respondents, 56% used flexible tube potential strategies (kV). Conclusion: The chest CT protocols and CM administration strategies employed by the respondents vary widely, affecting the image quality. The results of this study underline the need for further research and consensus guidelines related to chest CT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Brain metastases (BM) occur in about 30% of all patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). BM treatment guidelines recommend more frequent use of stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). Overall, studies report no difference in overall survival (OS) comparing SRT to whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT). We examined survival after radiotherapy for BM in a population-based sample from the South-Eastern Norway Regional Health Authority treated 2006-2018. We reviewed electronic medical records of 2140 NSCLC patients treated with SRT or WBRT for BM from 2006–2018. Overall survival (OS) was compared to predicted survival according to the prognostic systems DS-GPA and Lung-molGPA. Use of SRT increased during the period, from 19% (2006–2014) to 45% (2015–2018). Median OS for all patients was 3.0 months, increasing from 2.0 (2006) to 4.0 (2018). Median OS after SRT was 7.0 months (n = 435) and 3.0 months after WBRT (n = 1705). Twenty-seven percent of SRT patients and 50% of WBRT patients died within 90 days after start of RT. Age ≥70, male sex, KPS ≤70, non-adenocarcinoma histology, ECM present, multiple BM, and WBRT were associated with shorter survival (p <.001). Actual mOS corresponded best with predicted mOS by DS-GPA and Lung-molGPA for the SRT group. Overall survival after radiotherapy (RT) for BM improved during the study period, but only for patients treated with SRT. Survival after WBRT remains poor; its use should be questioned. DS-GPA and Lung-molGPA seem most useful in predicting prognosis considered for SRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose. To explore the relationship between radiotherapy (RT) dose levels in the arm/shoulder region and arm/shoulder morbidity in breast cancer patients. Material and methods. This study included 183 breast cancer patients who had received locoregional RT with or without chemotherapy and/or hormone treatment during the period 1998-2002. Individual RT dose level, reflected by dose-volume histograms (DVHs), for the shoulder joint and joining structures were obtained from archived CT-based RT plans. Individual median, mean and maximum arm/shoulder RT dose levels were extracted. Arm/shoulder morbidity was assessed 29-58 months after breast cancer treatment using the following clinical endpoints: arm pain, arm stiffness, swollen arm, use of arm, numbness, shoulder flexion and shoulder abduction difference, fibrosis and breast cancer-related lymphedema. The relationship between arm/shoulder RT dose level and these clinical endpoints was assessed by Spearman's correlation and multivariate logistic regression. Results. Ninety-one percent of the included patients had some degree of arm/shoulder morbidity. Neither mean nor maximum RT dose level was associated with clinical endpoints. However, significant correlations (p < 0.05) were found between DVHs and arm stiffness, arm pain, use of arm and shoulder abduction difference, when arm/shoulder RT dose levels were approximately 15 Gy. Conclusions. Three-dimensional conformal locoregional RT for breast cancer results in long-term arm/shoulder morbidity. To minimize this risk, large shoulder volumes receiving RT doses of approximately 15 Gy should be reduced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]