MRI-CT fusion to assess postbrachytherapy prostate volume and the effects of prolonged edema on dosimetry following transperineal interstitial permanent prostate brachytherapy.

PURPOSE Quality assurance through postplan assessment is an integral part of permanent seed prostate implants. The use of MRI-CT fusion for 1-month postimplant dosimetry permits accurate assessment of prostate volume without seed induced artifact and uncertainties of prostate contour inherent to CT assessments. Routine use of MRI-CT fusion reveals significant prostate edema may persist several weeks. This study evaluates the effect of edema, and its subsequent resolution, on dosimetry. METHODS AND MATERIALS From May 2001 to June 2003, 241 men were treated with (125)I seed implants based on a transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) preplan. Quality assessment was performed at 1 month by CT-MRI fusion using VariSeed software. Over this 24-month period, 29 patients (12%) with residual edema at 1 month (12-60% >TRUS plan volume), had repeat CT-MRI fusion at 2-4 months to reassess volume and dosimetry. Eleven of the 29 had received prior androgen ablation to shrink the prostate preimplant. RESULTS For the entire group (n = 241), mean preimplant prostate volume was 33.7 cc and median postplan dosimetric parameters were: V100, 92.2%; D90, 153 Gy; and V150, 53%. For the 29 patients with prolonged edema, mean preimplant volume was 34.8 cc and 1-month volume was 46.1 cc (p <0.001). Mean volume reduction between 1 and 2 months was 13%. The decrease in prostate volume had a significant effect on dosimetry with median increase between 1 month and 2 months in calculated V100 of 9.5%, V150 22.6%, V200 30.1%, and D90 11.5%. CONCLUSIONS Significant residual edema is seen 1-month postimplant in 12% of prostates and may have a profound effect on dosimetry. Further study is underway to characterize the time course of resolution of the edema, and to perform integral dosimetry based on the changing volume.

[1]  R Nath,et al.  The impact of edema on planning 125I and 103Pd prostate implants. , 1999, Medical physics.

[2]  Dan Ash,et al.  Impact of prostate volume evaluation by different observers on CT-based post-implant dosimetry. , 2002, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[3]  L. Potters,et al.  A comprehensive review of CT-based dosimetry parameters and biochemical control in patients treated with permanent prostate brachytherapy. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  G S Merrick,et al.  Influence of prophylactic dexamethasone on edema following prostate brachytherapy. , 2000, Techniques in urology.

[5]  C. Catton,et al.  Factors influencing risk of acute urinary retention after TRUS-guided permanent prostate seed implantation. , 2002, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  P. Grimm,et al.  American Brachytherapy Society (ABS) recommendations for transperineal permanent brachytherapy of prostate cancer. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[7]  E Bellon,et al.  The contribution of magnetic resonance imaging to the three-dimensional treatment planning of localized prostate cancer. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[8]  G. Glasgow,et al.  Effect of prostatic edema on CT-based postimplant dosimetry. , 2002, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  A. Tewari,et al.  Comparison of transrectal ultrasound prostatic volume estimation with magnetic resonance imaging volume estimation and surgical specimen weight in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia , 1996, Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU.

[10]  N. Yue,et al.  Dosimetric effects of edema in permanent prostate seed implants: a rigorous solution. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  W. Butler,et al.  Isotope choice and the effect of edema on prostate brachytherapy dosimetry. , 2000, Medical physics.

[12]  Nelson N. Stone,et al.  Postimplant dosimetry for (125)I prostate implants: definitions and factors affecting outcome. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[13]  W. Lee,et al.  The role of androgen deprivation therapy combined with prostate brachytherapy. , 2002, Urology.

[14]  Zhe Chen,et al.  Edema-induced increase in tumour cell survival for 125I and 103Pd prostate permanent seed implants--a bio-mathematical model. , 2002, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  Evaluation of post-plan dosimetry using TRUS and CT after transperineal prostate seed implant. , 2002, Medical dosimetry : official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists.

[16]  N. Yue,et al.  Edema associated with I-125 or Pd-103 prostate brachytherapy and its impact on post-implant dosimetry: an analysis based on serial CT acquisition. , 1998, International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics.

[17]  R. Stock,et al.  Importance of post-implant dosimetry in permanent prostate brachytherapy. , 2002, European urology.

[18]  M. Johnston,et al.  Systematic overview of the evidence for brachytherapy in clinically localized prostate cancer. , 2001, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[19]  P. Arger,et al.  The effect of androgen deprivation on the early changes in prostate volume following transperineal ultrasound guided interstitial therapy for localized carcinoma of the prostate. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[20]  J J Prete,et al.  Centralized multiinstitutional postimplant analysis for interstitial prostate brachytherapy. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[21]  W Cavanagh,et al.  Comparability of CT-based and TRUS-based prostate volumes. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[22]  L. Anderson,et al.  Dosimetry of interstitial brachytherapy sources: Recommendations of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No. 43 , 1995 .

[23]  J J Prete,et al.  Source localization following permanent transperineal prostate interstitial brachytherapy using magnetic resonance imaging. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[24]  R. Stock,et al.  A dose-response study for I-125 prostate implants. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[25]  P L Roberson,et al.  Impact of differences in ultrasound and computed tomography volumes on treatment planning of permanent prostate implants. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[26]  J. Battermann,et al.  Biologically effective dose for permanent prostate brachytherapy taking into account postimplant edema. , 2002, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[27]  Ivan Yeung,et al.  Interobserver variation in postimplant computed tomography contouring affects quality assessment of prostate brachytherapy. , 2002, Brachytherapy.

[28]  W. Butler,et al.  Potential role of various dosimetric quality indicators in prostate brachytherapy. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[29]  S Nag,et al.  The American Brachytherapy Society recommendations for permanent prostate brachytherapy postimplant dosimetric analysis. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[30]  W. Butler,et al.  The dependence of prostate postimplant dosimetric quality on CT volume determination. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[31]  R Nath,et al.  Optimum timing for image-based dose evaluation of 125I and 103PD prostate seed implants. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[32]  Benjamin R. Lee,et al.  Comparison of robotic versus laparoscopic skills: is there a difference in the learning curve? , 2002, Urology.

[33]  I. Hsu,et al.  Prostate volume change after radioactive seed implantation: possible benefit of improved dose volume histogram with perioperative steroid. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[34]  J J Prete,et al.  Intraobserver and interobserver variability of MR imaging- and CT-derived prostate volumes after transperineal interstitial permanent prostate brachytherapy. , 1998, Radiology.

[35]  J J Prete,et al.  Timing of computed tomography-based postimplant assessment following permanent transperineal prostate brachytherapy. , 1998, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.