Prostate deformation from inflatable rectal probe cover and dosimetric effects in prostate seed implant brachytherapy.

PURPOSE Prostate brachytherapy is an important treatment technique for patients with localized prostate cancer. An inflatable rectal ultrasound probe cover is frequently utilized during the procedure to adjust for unfavorable prostate position relative to the implant grid. However, the inflated cover causes prostate deformation, which is not accounted for during dosimetric planning. Most of the therapeutic dose is delivered after the procedure when the prostate and surrounding organs-at-risk are less deformed. The aim of this study is to quantify the potential dosimetry changes between the initial plan (prostate deformed) and the more realistic dosimetry when the prostate is less deformed without the cover. METHODS The authors prospectively collected the ultrasound images of the prostate immediately preceding and just after inflation of the rectal probe cover from thirty-four consecutive patients undergoing real-time planning of I-125 permanent seed implant. Manual segmentations of the deformed and undeformed images from each case were used as the input for model training to generate the initial transformation of a testing patient. During registration, the pixel-to-pixel transformation was further optimized to maximize the mutual information between the transferred deformed image and the undeformed images. The accuracy of image registration was evaluated by comparing the displacement of the urethra and calcification landmarks and by determining the Dice index between the registered and manual prostate contours. After registration, using the optimized transformation, the implanted seeds were mapped from the deformed prostate onto the undeformed prostate. The dose distribution of the undeformed anatomy, calculated using the VariSeed treatment planning system, was then analyzed and compared with that of the deformed prostate. RESULTS The accuracy of image registration was 1.5 ± 1.0 mm when evaluated by the displacement of calcification landmarks, 1.9 ± 1.1 mm when characterized by the displacement of the centroid of the urethra, and 0.86 ± 0.05 from the determination of the Dice index of prostate contours. The magnitude of dosimetric changes was associated with the degree of prostate deformation. The prostate coverage V100% dropped from 96.6 ± 1.7% on prostate-deformed plans to 92.6 ± 3.8% (p < 0.01) on undeformed plans, and the rectum V100% decreased from 0.48 ± 0.39 to 0.06 ± 0.14 cm3 (p < 0.01). The dose to the urethra increased, with the V150% increasing from 0.02 ± 0.06 to 0.11 ± 0.10 cm3 (p < 0.01) and D1% changing from 203.5 ± 22.7 to 239.5 ± 25.6 Gy (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS Prostate deformation from the inflation of an ultrasound rectal probe cover can significantly alter brachytherapy dosimetry. The authors have developed a deformable image registration method that allows for the characterization of dose with the undeformed anatomy. This may be used to more accurately reflect the dosimetry when the prostate is not deformed by the probe cover.

[1]  A. Kishan,et al.  Late rectal toxicity after low-dose-rate brachytherapy: incidence, predictors, and management of side effects. , 2015, Brachytherapy.

[2]  Rolf Bendl,et al.  Accuracy quantification of a deformable image registration tool applied in a clinical setting , 2014, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.

[3]  J. Pouliot,et al.  The need for application-based adaptation of deformable image registration. , 2012, Medical physics.

[4]  Guila Delouya,et al.  Urethra-sparing, intraoperative, real-time planned, permanent-seed prostate brachytherapy: toxicity analysis. , 2011, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[5]  K. Brock Results of a multi-institution deformable registration accuracy study (MIDRAS). , 2010, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  Ravinder Nath,et al.  AAPM recommendations on dose prescription and reporting methods for permanent interstitial brachytherapy for prostate cancer: Report of Task Group 137. , 2009, Medical physics.

[7]  W. J. Morris,et al.  Evaluation of dosimetric parameters and disease response after 125 iodine transperineal brachytherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[8]  W. J. Morris,et al.  Population-based study of biochemical and survival outcomes after permanent 125I brachytherapy for low- and intermediate-risk prostate cancer. , 2009, Urology.

[9]  L. Potters,et al.  Long-term outcomes in younger men following permanent prostate brachytherapy. , 2009, The Journal of urology.

[10]  M. Macpherson,et al.  Calcifications are potential surrogates for prostate localization in image-guided radiotherapy. , 2008, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  K. Wallner,et al.  Dosimetric parameters as predictive factors for biochemical control in patients with higher risk prostate cancer treated with Pd-103 and supplemental beam radiation. , 2007, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[12]  M. Kessler Image registration and data fusion in radiation therapy. , 2006, The British journal of radiology.

[13]  T. Kanade,et al.  Ultrasound Registration of the Bone Surface for Surgical Navigation , 2003, Computer aided surgery : official journal of the International Society for Computer Aided Surgery.

[14]  P.L. Carson,et al.  Rapid elastic image registration for 3-D ultrasound , 2002, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[15]  Blasko,et al.  10-year biochemical (prostate-specific antigen) control of prostate cancer with (125)I brachytherapy. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[16]  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.

[17]  Max A. Viergever,et al.  Image registration by maximization of combined mutual information and gradient information , 2000, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[18]  K. Wallner,et al.  Five-year biochemical outcome and toxicity with transperineal CT-planned permanent I-125 prostate implantation for patients with localized prostate cancer. , 2000, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[19]  R Nath,et al.  Permanent prostate seed implant brachytherapy: report of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group No. 64. , 1999, Medical physics.

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

[21]  P. Okunieff,et al.  Automated treatment planning engine for prostate seed implant brachytherapy. , 1999, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

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

[23]  Robert Rohling,et al.  Automatic registration of 3-D ultrasound images , 1998, Sixth International Conference on Computer Vision (IEEE Cat. No.98CH36271).

[24]  M. Zelefsky,et al.  Long-term results of retropubic permanent 125iodine implantation of the prostate for clinically localized prostatic cancer. , 1997, The Journal of urology.

[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]  M. Ranney,et al.  Beyond the bedside: Clinicians as guardians of public health, medicine and science , 2020, The American Journal of Emergency Medicine.

[27]  Alan Jones,et al.  To whom correspondence should be addressed , 2014 .

[28]  Wayne M Butler,et al.  American Brachytherapy Society consensus guidelines for transrectal ultrasound-guided permanent prostate brachytherapy. , 2012, Brachytherapy.

[29]  W. Butler,et al.  AAPM Recommendations on Dose Prescription and Reporting Methods for Permanent Interstitial Brachytherapy for Prostate Cancer Report of AAPMTask Group , 2009 .

[30]  P. Clark,et al.  Dosimetric Quantifiers for Low Dose Rate Prostate Brachytherapy: V100 Is Superior to D90 , 2005 .

[31]  P. Clark,et al.  Dosimetric quantifiers for low-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy: is V(100) superior to D(90)? , 2005, Brachytherapy.

[32]  D. Hill,et al.  Non-rigid image registration: theory and practice. , 2004, The British journal of radiology.

[33]  Aaron D. Wyner,et al.  Claude E. Shannon , 1993 .

[34]  Claude E. Shannon,et al.  Prediction and Entropy of Printed English , 1951 .