Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
TURK ONKOLOJI DERGISI, cilt.39, sa.4, ss.393-400, 2024 (ESCI)
OBJECTIVE The aim of our study is to analyze the changes in dosimetric parameters obtained in pre-planning (PP), intraoperative planning (IOP), and post-implant dosimetry (PID). METHODS The study focused on the prostate as the target volume, with the rectum and urethra designated as organs at risk (OARs). Dosimetric differences between PP and IOP, PP and PID, and IOP and PID were assessed, including parameters such as prostate dose and volumes D90, pV100, pV150; urethral doses uD10, uD30, uD50; urethral volumes uV100, uV150; and rectal volumes rV100, rV150. RESULTS Comparing pD90 values between PP and IOP, PP and PID, and IOP and PID applications yielded p-values of 0.393, <0.001, and <0.001, respectively. For pV90 values, comparisons between PP and IOP, PP and PID, and IOP and PID showed p-values of 0.084, <0.001, and 0.001, respectively. No significant differences were observed in pD90, pV100, uD50, uV100, or rV50 when comparing PP with IOP. Similarly, no significant differences were found in uD50 or rV50 when comparing PP with PID. Comparing IOP with PID revealed no significant differences in pV150, uD30, rV50, or pV150. However, significant differences were found in all other parameters among the three applications. CONCLUSION The dose distribution in PP undergoes significant alterations due to edema formation and changes in the placement of OARs. Although it was determined that there were changes in PID according to the PP and IOP dose distribution, it was found to be compatible with the criteria reported in AAPM TG 137.
Keywords: Brachytherapy; intraoperative plan; LDR; post-implant dosimetry prostate; pre-plan.
Copyright © 2024, Turkish Society for Radiation Oncology