Postimplant dosimetry (PID) after Iodine-125 (125I) implant of the prostate should offer a reliable qualitative assessment.
So far, there is no consensus regarding the optimum PID method, though the latest literature is in favor of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). This study aims to simultaneously compare 3 PID techniques: (1) MRI-computed tomography (CT) fusion; (2) ultrasound (US)-CT fusion; and (3) manual target delineation on CT. The study comprised 10 patients with prostate cancer. CT/MR scans with urinary catheters in place for PID were done either on day 0 or day 1 postimplantation. The main parameter evaluated and compared among methods was target D90. The results show that CT-based D90s are lower than US-CT D90s (median difference,-6.85%), whereas MR-CT PID gives higher D90 than US-CT PID (median difference, 4.25%). Manual contouring on CT images tends to overestimate the prostate volume compared with transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) (median difference, 23.33%), whereas on US images the target is overestimated compared with MR-based contouring (median difference, 13.25%). Although there are certain differences among the results given by various PID techniques, the differences are statistically insignificant for this small group of patients. Any dosimetric comparison between 2 PID techniques should also account for the limitations of each technique, to allow for an accurate quantification of data. Given that PID after permanent radioactive seed implant is mandatory for quality assurance, any imaging method-based PID (MR-CT, US-CT, and CT) available in a radiotherapy department can be indicative of the quality of the procedure.
Marcu LG, Gowda R. Are you the author?
Department of Medical Physics, Royal Adelaide Hospital, South Australia, Australia; Faculty of Science, University of Oradea, Romania; School of Chemistry and Physics, University of Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Reference: Med Dosim. 2013 Apr 20. pii: S0958-3947(13)00023-X.