Prediction of optimal needle configuration in the first fraction of cervix brachytherapy.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Applying needles in the first brachytherapy (BT) fraction for patients with locally advanced cervical cancer allows for more dose conformality and OAR sparing, but is more challenging than in subsequent fractions, as pre-implant imaging with applicator in situ is lacking. We investigate whether a needle simulation, a fixed needle configuration or a multidisciplinary discussion-based configuration can predict more accurately which applicator needle positions are best suited for use in the first BT fraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For 20 patients we retrospectively determined the "reference" needle configuration (RC) for the first BT fraction using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans with applicator in situ. We simulated a pre-MRI needle configuration (PC) using the MRI made in the fourth week of external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) without applicator in situ. We generated a fixed needle configuration (FC) from the most common RC needles. Using Dice's similarity coefficient (DSC) we compared each of these needle configurations, including the clinically applied "multidisciplinary consensus" needle configuration (MC), with RC. We considered two scenarios: allowing up to ten needles (scenario 1), and limiting the needle number (scenario 2). The analysis was repeated omitting two mid-ventral needles previously determined as non-essential to treatment planning. RESULTS: For both scenarios, the median DSC for PC and FC was higher than for MC (scenario1:DSCPC = 0,78; DSCFC = 0,75; DSCMC = 0,57; scenario 2:DSCPC = 0,74; DSCFC = 0,73; DSCMC = 0,59), while omitting mid-ventral needles resulted in no statistically significant differences in DSC. CONCLUSIONS: The PC or FC method are at least as accurate as the MC, with the FC preferred for efficiency.

Needle use and dosimetric evaluation in cervical cancer brachytherapy using the Utrecht applicator.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To analyse the clinical use of needles and examine the feasibility to meet the planning criteria in three fractions of cervical cancer brachytherapy. Furthermore, to investigate whether the needles with the largest discrepancy between application and loading are essential to treatment planning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For 22 patients we analysed the applied and loaded needle patterns, and examined the dosimetric results for small (<30 cm3) and large (≥30 cm3) CTVHR. We removed from the clinical plans (CP) the needles applied most, but with the lowest loading frequency and intensity and re-optimized these plans (RP). RESULTS: On average 5.8 needles were applied and 4.8 loaded per fraction, with average intensity 22% (17% for small, 29% for large CTVHR). Mid-lateral needles were applied and loaded most frequently and intensely. The average CTVHR D90% prescribed dose was 88.8 Gy (SD 4.2) EQD210, the average OAR [Formula: see text] limit was respected. Omitting the mid-ventral needles, minimal statistically significant differences were found in dose distributions between RP and CP. CONCLUSIONS: Applying on average 5.8 needles per fraction it was possible to meet the planning criteria for targets and OARs in three BT fractions for both small and large CTVHR. The mid-ventral needles were not essential in treatment planning, unless situated in the vicinity of the GTVres.