eISSN: 2081-2841
ISSN: 1689-832X
Journal of Contemporary Brachytherapy
Current Issue Archive Supplements Articles in Press Journal Information Aims and Scope Editorial Office Editorial Board Register as Author Register as Reviewer Instructions for Authors Abstracting and indexing Subscription Advertising Information Links
Editorial System
Submit your Manuscript
SCImago Journal & Country Rank

1/2024
vol. 16
 
Share:
Share:
Original paper

Dosimetric comparison of intra-cavitary brachytherapy technique with free-hand (intra-cavitary + interstitial) technique in cervical cancer

Sumukh Jamadagni
1
,
Arul Ponni
2
,
Revathy P
2

  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Vijayanagar Institute of Medical Sciences, Bellary, India
  2. 2Department of Radiation Oncology, Ramaiah Medical College and Hospitals, Ramaiah University of Applied Sciences, Bengaluru, India
J Contemp Brachytherapy 2024; 16, 1: 28–34
Online publish date: 2024/02/23
Article file
Get citation
 
 

Purpose

After breast cancer, colorectal cancer, and lung cancer, cervical cancer is the fourth most common cancer in women in the world. Approximately 604,127 new cases of cervical cancer and 341,831 deaths from this disease occurred in 2020 worldwide [1]. Low- and middle-income countries accounted for 90% of the incidence and mortality [2]. India accounts for nearly one-fifth of the global cervical cancer cases, with 2.01% cumulative risk of incidence and 1.3% cumulative risk of death from this disease [3].

Current standard of treatment for locally advanced carcinoma cervix is external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with concurrent chemotherapy followed by brachytherapy (BT) [4], the latter contributing to excellent local control to a total EQD2 of 85-90 Gy equally divided between EBRT and brachytherapy [5].

Intra-cavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) and interstitial brachytherapy (ISBT) are two most common types of BT following EBRT. A comparatively lesser implemented third type of brachytherapy, free-hand technique (intra-cavitary + interstitial, IC + IS) is a combination of intra-cavitary brachytherapy and placement of needles, without the use of a template in a selected group of patients. In view of an increased patient load to up to 6-8 cervix brachytherapy patients per week, and more than 2/3rd of patients with locally advanced stages, with limited number of ISBT templates, we implemented IC + IS technique in selected sub-set of patients in order to reduce waiting period.

There are few studies describing this technique in the literature. Therefore, in the current study, we dosimetrically compared ICBT with free-hand technique (IC + IS).

Material and methods

After obtaining ethical clearance and informed consent from patients, this prospective dosimetric study was conducted among 27 histologically proven locally advanced carcinoma cervix patients. All of them received EBRT to a dose of 45 Gy in 25 fractions, over 5 weeks using three dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), along with 4-6 cycles of concurrent weekly cisplatin/carboplatin chemotherapy [6].

Brachytherapy was applied under combined spinal epidural anesthesia within 10 days following completion of EBRT. Apart from the central disease, patients with more than medial 1/3rd parametrial residual disease but not extending up to lateral pelvic wall at brachytherapy were considered for free-hand technique. Based on findings from examination under anesthesia (EUA), the number of needles to be placed was decided. IC + IS technique was done following catheterization of the bladder.

Free-hand (IC + IS) technique

Figure 1 shows free-hand brachytherapy technique with the position of needles and intra-cavitary applicators. A sterile plastic suction catheter was cut appropriately to obtain two small pieces of ~4 cm in length each, to accommodate 2-3 needles, 1 cm apart. Using a sterile marker pen, 3 points were marked on these suction tubes 1 centimeter apart. Based on the decision, needles were inserted at the marked points on the suction catheter. One piece of this catheter was fixed at 4 cm behind the tip of needles, and the other piece at the distal end of needles to stabilize the applicators. Based on pre-EBRT MRI and EUA (evaluation under anesthesia) findings, the length of needles inserted during brachytherapy was decided. Since all our patients had combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, during CT simulation, the position of needles was verified and corrected if required. The distance between the needles was kept at minimum of 1 cm and less than 2 cm. If anatomy was favorable, 3 needles were inserted, whereas in narrow or conical vagina, 2 needles were inserted. Figure 2 demonstrates the alignment and position of needles with respect to ICBT applicator. Tandem of appropriate length was inserted into the uterine cavity. Following insertion of the central tandem, the needles were inserted at the respective side of the fornix and two ovoids on either side of the tandem medially to the needles. After securing the applicators in place, careful vaginal packing was done using betadine-soaked gauze to displace the bladder and rectum, and also to augment the applicator’s stability. Rectal tube was placed for instilling diluted contrast in the rectum during simulation. Computerized tomography (CT) simulation was performed with 2.5 mm slice thickness. For the bladder and rectum delineation, contrast mixed with normal saline (NS) was instilled. CT images were transferred to HDR Plus treatment planning system (TPS), version 3.0.8.

Fig. 1

Intra-cavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) applicators with free-hand needles in situ

/f/fulltexts/JCB/52450/JCB-16-52450-g001_min.jpg
Fig. 2

Position of free-hand needles with respect to Fletcher suit applicator in intra-cavitary + interstitial (IC + IS) technique

/f/fulltexts/JCB/52450/JCB-16-52450-g002_min.jpg

Brachytherapy planning

High-risk clinical target volume (CTVHR) was delineated based on EUA findings at brachytherapy and pre-EBRT MRI that defined CTVIR, or a 1 cm margin around HR-CTVCT according to Viswanathan et al. guidelines [7]. Therefore, one centimeter margin to CTVHR formed intermediate-risk clinical target volume (CTVIR). According to our department protocol, the bladder, rectum, and sigmoid were contoured, and constraints were assigned.

Multiplanar reconstruction view was utilized for applicator digitization. Surface control points were created on CTVHR and OARs. Forward treatment plan was generated in HDR Plus v. 3.0.8 TPS using Task Group 43 (TG-43) algorithm [8, 9]. Dose constraints were 6.5 Gy to CTVHR, 5 Gy to 2 cc bladder, and 4 Gy to 2 cc rectum and sigmoid colon. Re-shaper tool was applied for optimization to achieve better CTVHR coverage and minimize dose to OARs.

Needle dwell positions were activated inside the CTVHR volume. Two unique plans were created for each patient. The ICBT plan was devised by deactivating free-hand needles and planning with the central tandem and two ovoids only, whereas the free-hand plan was generated by including free-hand needles with the central tandem and ovoids. The target volume coverage of high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) and OARs (organs at risk) dose of the bladder, rectum, and sigmoid were compared between these two plans. A dose of 6.5 Gy per fraction to a total of four fractions was prescribed to HR-CTV. Dosimetric comparison between these two plans was done by analyzing dose volume histograms (DVH) and documenting dose to HR-CTV using V90 (%), V100 (%), V150 (%), V200 (%), D90 (Gy), D98 (Gy), D100 (Gy), and D2cc for OARs.

All fractions were delivered over two days, with minimum of six hours gap between two fractions, in a single session [10]. All patients were treated using BEBIG Multisource cobalt-60 (60Co) HDR afterloader (model A.1.86). EQD2 for 2 cm3 of the bladder, rectum, sigmoid, D90, and D98 were calculated for both the plans using the following formula:

BED = nd (1 + d/α/β) and EQD2 = BED/[1 + (2/α/β)],

where n is the number of fractions and d is the dose per fraction. The α/β ratio was considered as 3 for the normal tissue and 10 for the tumor.

Statistical analysis

Sample size was calculated based on a previous study conducted by Oike et al. [11], where considering D90% coverage in IC/IS plan, it was found to be 118 ±22%. In the present study, considering the power of 80%, relative precision of 7%, and confidence level of 95%, minimum sample size was calculated to be 27. Statistical software, SPSS Inc., version 18.0 was used for data analysis, with p-value of < 0.05 considered statistically significant. Qualitative variables were presented as frequency and percentage. All quantitative variables were analyzed using mean and standard deviation parameters. With paired t-test, different doses were compared and statistical significance was determined.

Results

Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Our study included a total of 27 patients, with a mean age of 55 years, ranging between 43 and 74 years. All the patients received EBRT to a dose of 45 Gy in 25 fractions using 3D-CRT technique. All brachytherapy plans were optimized to 6.5 Gy per fraction to a total of 4 fractions in this dosimetric study. The number of needles inserted was influenced by the extent of residual parametrial disease and vaginal anatomy. A total of 79 needles were used in the study, ranging from a minimum of 2 needles to maximum of 6 needles for a patient.

Table 1

Patient characteristics and frequency

CharacteristicsTotal number of patients, N = 27 (100%)
n (%)
Age (years)
  ≤ 5011 (40.7)
  > 5016 (59.3)
Comorbidities
  Nil11 (40.7)
  Hypertension5 (18.5)
  Diabetes5 (18.5)
  Both6 (22.2)
Stage
  IIB8 (30)
  IIIB19 (70)
Histopathology
  Squamous cell carcinoma27 (100)
Chemotherapy
  Cisplatin25 (93)
  Carboplatin2 (7)
Number of needles
  Unilateral 3 needles17 (63)
  Unilateral 2 needles8 (30)
  Bilateral 3 needles2 (7)

DVH parameters

The HR-CTV of V90 and V100 showed statistical significance with p-value of < 0.0001, favoring the free-hand technique; however, it did not show significant difference for V150 and V200. Upon comparison of D90, D98, and D100, the mean values in the ICBT plan were 5.26 Gy, 3.72 Gy, and 2.61 Gy, while in the free-hand plan, the mean values were 6.28 Gy, 4.91 Gy, and 3.62 Gy, respectively, with statistically significant p-value of < 0.0001 (Table 2). The calculation of EQD2 values led to the following results. In the free-hand plan, EQD2 values of D90, D98, and D100 were 78.47 Gy, 68.85 Gy, and 60.81 Gy, respectively. However, the corresponding parameters in the ICBT plan were 71.07 Gy, 61.50 Gy, and 55.35 Gy, respectively, with all free-hand values being statistically significant (p ≤ 0.0001).

Table 2

Comparison of mean dose of high-risk clinical target volume (HR-CTV) between intra-cavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) and free-hand plans

HR-CTV parametersICBTFree-handp-value
(< 0.05 significant)
Mean ±SD
V90 (%)87.22 ±2.9194.2 ±2.52< 0.0001
V100 (%)81.51 ±2.9089.06 ±3.47< 0.0001
V150 (%)50.59 ±6.2453.15 ±6.850.06
V200 (%)28.03 ±4.4627.63 ±4.190.62
D90 (Gy)5.26 ±0.86 (81%)6.28 ±0.57 (97%)< 0.0001
D98 (Gy)3.72 ±0.76 (57%)4.91 ±0.73 (75%)< 0.0001
D100 (Gy)2.61 ±0.593.62 ±0.61< 0.0001

OARs dose

Table 3 demonstrates comparison of OARs doses with ICBT and free-hand techniques, with no statistical difference between these two methods. The mean EQD2 for the bladder D2cc was 70.08 Gy and 71.28 Gy for the ICBT and free-hand plans, respectively, with no statistical significance (p = 0.92).

Table 3

Mean dose of organs at risk in intra- cavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) and free-hand technique

D2ccMean dose (Gy)p-value
ICBTFree-hand
Bladder4.46 ±0.644.59 ±0.570.08
Rectum3.90 ±0.533.98 ±0.510.15
Sigmoid colon2.67 ±0.922.77 ±0.960.22

The EQD2 for the rectum was 64.94 Gy in the ICBT technique vs. 65.57 Gy in the free-hand technique, and was statistically non-significant (p = 0.18). Similarly, EQD2 for the sigmoid was 55.95 Gy in the ICBT plan and 56.59 Gy in the free-hand plan, with a p-value of 0.16.

Discussion

It has been well-established that there is a significant correlation between dose to target volume and local control in carcinoma cervix [12]. The need for ISBT arises when there is more than medial 1/3rd parametrium involvement. However, ISBT is invasive, tedious, resource-intensive, time-consuming procedure, causing discomfort for the patient. In order to overcome these, a combination of intra-cavitary and interstitial brachytherapy was implemented. The current prospective dosimetric study compared intra-cavitary and free-hand brachytherapy techniques in patients with locally advanced carcinoma cervix. Similar dosimetric studies comparing ICBT with combined IC + IS brachytherapy technique by generating 2 separate plans for each patient have been conducted, including Akbarov et al. [13], Qu et al. [14], Tambaş [15], and Nomden et al. [16], using IC/IS applicators. However, among the combined IC/IS approaches, only a few authors, such as Yoshio et al. [17], Liu et al. [18], Wang et al. [19], and Bajwa et al. [20] have correlated DVH parameters between ICBT and free-hand IC + IS techniques.

Assessment of parametria

In the present study, the decision about the number of needles and their positions was done according to EUA findings during brachytherapy, whereas Bajwa et al. [20] and Liu et al. [18] used pre-brachytherapy MR images. This is probably due to the limited availability of MRI facility in Indian setting. Moreover, a thorough pelvic examination under anesthesia is sufficient to decide about the applicators and needle placement [21].

Free-hand technique

Number of needles

A total of 79 needles were used in our study. It ranged from a minimum of 2 needles to maximum of 6 needles per patient. The number of needles were decided based on the parametrial disease – whether unilateral or bilateral, similar to Yoshio et al. study [17]. However, the numbers of needles used for each patient in Wang et al. [19] and Liu et al. [18] studies were ranging from 4 to 7 and 6.9 ±1.4, respectively, which were slightly higher compared with those in our study. This is attributable to the use of image guidance during the procedures.

Free-hand needle approach

The free-hand needle insertion can be performed either trans-vaginally, entering through the fornices into the involved parametrium, or through transperineal approach without a template. However, in Liu et al. [18] study, the needles were inserted at 2, 4, 8, and 10 o’clock positions, without using ovoids, while Bajwa et al. [20] reported using transperineal approach. In our study, we inserted the needles through the vaginal fornices based on the involved side before the insertion of vaginal ovoids.

Image guidance

Most of the studies used image guidance in the form of ultrasound, CT scan, and C-arm CT for the free-hand interstitial needle insertion (Table 4). CT image guidance was applied by Liu et al. [18], whereas Wang et al. [19] along with CT image guidance, used rectal contrast to delineate better while inserting the needles. Trans-rectal ultrasound and fluoroscopy were applied in Yoshio et al. [17] study. However, Bajwa et al. [20] started their study with the use of C-arm guidance, which did not result in desired implant geometry in the first two cases, as it was a learning curve for them. But subsequently, with C-arm itself, implant geometry was achieved. Image guidance facilitated the usage of a greater number of needles inserted into the involved parametrium with desired implant geometry, achieving adequate depth and minimizing the implant complications.

Table 4

Comparison of D90 (Gy) EQD2 values among various studies

Study [Ref.]Image used for the procedure guidance and planningD90 (Gy) of free-hand planMean D90 (Gy) of ICBT
(p-value)
MedianMean
Wang et al. [19]CT image
plus rectal contrast
94 (83.0-104.0)
Murakami et al. [27]Pre-brachy MRI,
CT for planning
70.3 (56.2-97.3)
Liu et al. [18]CT88.1 ±3.376.9 ±5.7 (0.000)
Bajwa et al. [20]C-arm82.0
Yoshio et al. [17]TRUS and fluoroscopy67.7 ±0.6157.3 ±1.2 (< 0.0001)
Our studyPre-EBRT MRI
CT for planning
78.4771.07 (< 0.0001)

In our study, the free-hand needle insertion took place without any image guidance due to the lack of resources. The position of needles were sufficient and satisfactory, and there were no needle-related complications, such as bowel injury, confirmed by brachytherapy CT simulation scans (Figure 3).

Fig. 3

Isodose distribution in sagittal, coronal, and axial views in intra-cavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) (A) and intra-cavitary + interstitial (IC + IS) technique (B)

/f/fulltexts/JCB/52450/JCB-16-52450-g003_min.jpg

Depth of insertion

The depth of insertion of the needles in our study was uniformly kept at 4 cm from the vaginal fornix, as we did not use image guidance for the needle insertion. There was no procedure-related complications, such as bladder or bowel perforations, due to uniform depth of insertion. However, in a study by Qu et al. [14], the mean depth of insertion of the distal parametrial needle was 6.52 ±2.8 cm, as it was done under ultrasound guidance. Moreover, Liu et al. [18] demonstrated that 5 of 52 patients (9.6%) suffered intestinal injury; therefore, these needles were not loaded.

Fixation of free-hand needles

In our study, the free-hand needles were fixed using suction catheters, which did not require suturing (Figures 1 and 2). The applicators were stabilized with the help of the gauze tied to the abdomen. In a study by Wang et al. [19], the needles were fixed using a button stopper that was sutured to the perineum. Bajwa et al. [20] employed sterile pieces of thermoplastic cast and standard interstitial needle screws to stabilize the needles through the holes in aquaplast, which were sutured to the perineum.

DVH parameters

The free-hand and ICBT plans had a mean V100 values of 89.06% and 81.51% (p ≤ 0.0001), respectively. Interestingly, no other known free-hand study had compared V90% values. The V100 (%) values in Yoshio et al. [17] study were slightly higher than that of the current study (96 ±3.7%). This may be due to the transperineal approach of the needle insertion to cover the entire residual parametrial disease.

However, V150% and V200% values of both the plans were not significant in our study, with p-values of 0.06 and 0.62, respectively, which is in line with Yoshio et al. [17] research. The EQD2 values of D90, D98, and D100 showed statistical significance in the ICBT plan with 71.07 Gy, 61.50 Gy, and 55.35 Gy, respectively, while that of the free-hand plan were 78.47 Gy, 68.85 Gy, and 60.81 Gy, respectively (p ≤ 0.0001).

Liu et al. [18] achieved a mean D90 of 88.1 ±3.3 Gy as a result of placement of oblique needles, i.e., free-hand needle inserted from the left side of the introitus to the right parametrium and vice versa under image guidance. In a study by Bajwa et al. [20], the mean D90 was 82 Gy, slightly higher than in our study (Table 4). This may be due to the fact that Bajwa et al. inserted transperineal needles under image guidance, which helped to achieve a bit higher D90 value than that achieved in the present study.

As a department protocol, we tried to accomplish a maximum EQD2 of 80 Gy to HR-CTV keeping OARs doses well within 75 Gy EQD2 for the bladder and 65 Gy EQD2 for the rectum. This is based on Viswanathan et al. [22] study reporting that with CT-based planning, there is an over-estimation of the width of HR-CTV as compared with MRI-based planning [23, 24]. This leads to an increased volume receiving prescription dose. Hence, the D90 value in our study is relatively smaller compared with other studies. This is supported by our department data, [23, 25], showing a local control rate of 87.14% at 2 years in locally advanced carcinoma cervix patients.

In our study, in the free-hand and ICBT plans, the D2cc values of the bladder, rectum, and sigmoid were 4.59 Gy, 3.98 Gy, and 2.77 Gy, and 4.46 Gy, 3.90 Gy, and 2.67 Gy, respectively, with no statistical significance (p = 0.08, 0.15, 0.2, respectively) as the needles were placed in the parametrium laterally. In terms of EQD2, the D2cc values of the bladder, rectum, and sigmoid were 70.08 Gy, 64.94 Gy, and 55.95 Gy in the ICBT plan, respectively. Similarly, the D2cc EQD2 values of the bladder, rectum, and sigmoid were 71.28 Gy, 65.57 Gy, and 56.59 Gy in the free-hand plan, respectively.

Advantages of free-hand technique

Patient’s comfort was one of the major advantages of the free-hand brachytherapy; this procedure was well-tolerated compared with interstitial brachytherapy. This is probably due to the fact that the free-hand technique involves insertion of needles through vaginal fornices, whereas in interstitial brachytherapy, needles are inserted transperineally using a template, causing significant discomfort in ISBT patients. Therefore, regarding patient’s comfort, the free-hand technique is better than interstitial brachytherapy in suitably selected patients. Patients tolerated this procedure well with combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, with top-up at regular intervals.

Applicator removal

Free-hand needles were removed following the removal of ovoids and central tandem, so that we could assess and appropriately manage any possible bleeding occurring due to the removal of needles. As compared with template-based interstitial brachytherapy associated with a significant amount of bleeding on removal of the applicators, especially from the needle entry points over the perineal skin, minimal or no bleeding were noticed on removal of needles in the free-hand brachytherapy technique, as the needles were inserted through the fornices and not through the perineum. In our study, in a very few patients, the bleeding points were easily managed with application of appropriate pressure using a gauze pad.

Another notable advantage is that the free-hand brachytherapy technique can be used in clinical setting where multiple applications are practiced, as in Yoshio et al. [17] and Liu et al. [18]studies, instead of treating all fractions in a single-application setting. Added advantages in an outpatient setting include lower risk of hospital-acquired infection, lower financial cost to patient, and better workflow protocol within the department [26].

In this study, we observed that there was a better CTVHR coverage and OARs doses equivalent to that of intra-cavitary brachytherapy technique, showing a trend towards usage of the free-hand technique in suitable locally advanced carcinoma cervix patients [27].

Lack of image guidance during application is the only limitation of our study. MR imagining was not considered as part of our study.

Conclusions

The free-hand technique (IC + IS) is a relatively simple procedure, and provides a greater degree of freedom for needle insertion resulting in greater patient’s comfort when compared with ISBT and other template-based techniques. The target volume coverage was statistically significant when compared with ICBT, with no difference in OARs doses. It emerges as a reliable and feasible option for patients with more than medial 1/3rd parametrial residual disease following EBRT, but not extending up to lateral pelvic wall. However, a clinical comparison of the same is needed in a future study. Therefore, the free-hand technique (IC + IS) is a reliable and practical alternative that can be employed even in resource-limited settings.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflict of interest.

References

1 

GLOBOCAN 2020: Cancer Today. Available from: https://gco.iarc.fr/today/online-analysis-multi-bars?v=2020 (cited 24 January 2022).

2 

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL et al. Global Cancer Statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2021; 71: 209-249.

3 

GLOBOCAN 2020: India Factsheet. Gco.iarc.fr. 2022. Available from: https://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/populations/356-india-factsheets.pdf (cited 24 January 2022).

4 

NCI/NCCN National Comprehensive Cancer Network: Cervical cancer (version1.2022). https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/cervical.pdf

5 

Sturdza A, Potter R, Fokdal LU et al. Image guided brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: Improved pelvic control and survival in RetroEMBRACE, a multicenter cohort study. Radiat Oncol 2016; 120: 428-433.

6 

Chemo radiotherapy for cervical cancer Meta-analysis Collaboration (CCCMAC). Reducing uncertainties about the effects of chemoradiotherapy for cervical cancer: individual patient data meta-analysis. Cochrane database Syst Rev 2010; 1: CD008285.

7 

Viswanathan AN, Erickson B, Gaffney DK et al. Comparison and consensus guidelines for delineation of clinical target volume for CT-and MR-based brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 90: 320-328.

8 

Safigholi H, Chamberland MJP, Taylor REP et al. Update of the CLRP Monte Carlo TG-43 parameter database for high-energy brachytherapy sources. Med Phys 2023; 50: 1928-1941.

9 

The CLRP TG-43 Parameter Database for Brachytherapy, H. Safigholi, M.J.P. Chamberland et al.; version 2 Carleton University Canada’s Capital University CLRP TG-43 Database, V2.

10 

Ravindran E, Kumar M, Gururajachar JM et al. Interinstitutional comparison of treatment practice for cervical cancer with special emphasis on brachytherapy. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2019; 11: 423-427.

11 

Oike T, Ohno T, Noda S et al. Can combined intracavitary/interstitial approach be an alternative to interstitial brachytherapy with the Martinez Universal Perineal Interstitial Template (MUPIT) in computed tomography-guided adaptive brachytherapy for bulky and/or irregularly shaped gynecological tumors? Radiat Oncol 2014; 9: 222.

12 

Pötter R, Dimopoulos J, Georg P et al. Clinical impact of MRI assisted dose volume adaptation and dose escalation in brachytherapy of locally advanced cervix cancer. Radiother Oncol 2007; 83: 148-155.

13 

Akbarov K, Guliyev E, Aliyeva N et al. Intracavitary versus intracavitary/interstitial HDR brachytherapy for cervical cancer: Dose difference to high risk clinical target volume. Brachytherapy 2017; 16: S61-S62.

14 

Qu HD, Han DM, Zhang N et al. Intracavitary/interstitial applicator plus distal parametrial free needle interstitial brachytherapy in locally advanced cervical cancer: A dosimetric study. Front Oncol 2021; 10: 621347

15 

Tambaş M. Therapeutic benefit of intracavitary-interstitial brachytherapy in cervical cancer patients with small and large high-risk clinical target volume. TJ Oncol 2021; 36: 4.

16 

Nomden CN, de Leeuw AA, Moerland MA et al. Clinical use of the utrecht applicator for combined intracavitary/interstitial brachytherapy treatment in locally advanced cervical cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012; 82: 1424-1430.

17 

Yoshio K, Murakami N, Morota M et al. Inverse planning for combination of intracavitary and interstitial brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer. J Radiat Res 2013; 54: 1146-1152.

18 

Liu Z, Guo J, Zhao Y et al. Computed tomography-guided interstitial brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer: Introduction of the technique and a comparison of dosimetry with conventional intracavitary brachytherapy. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2017; 27: 768-775.

19 

Wang Y, Ye W, Du L et al. Dose-volume parameters and clinical outcome of CT-guided free-hand high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy for cervical cancer. Chin J Cancer 2012; 31: 598-604.

20 

Bajwa HK, Singareddy R, Krishnam Raju A. Outcomes of freehand interstitial brachytherapy in advanced gynecologic malignancies. Brachytherapy 2020; 19: 669-673.

21 

Mahantshetty U, Gudi S, Singh R et al. Indian Brachytherapy Society Guidelines for radiotherapeutic management of cervical cancer with special emphasis on high-dose-rate brachytherapy. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2019; 11: 293-306.

22 

Viswanathan AN, Dimopoulos J, Kirisits C et al. Computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging-based contouring in cervical cancer brachytherapy: Results of a prospective trial and preliminary guidelines for standardized contours. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2007; 68: 491-498.

23 

International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements Report. Prescribing, recording, and reporting brachytherapy for cancer of the cervix (ICRU Report 89), Bedhesda 2013.

24 

Potter R, Tanderup K, Kirisits C et al. The EMBRACE II study: The outcome and prospect of two decades of evolution within GEC-ESTRO GYN working group and the EMBRACE studies. Clin Transl Radiat Oncol 2018; 9: 48-60.

25 

Kumar M, Thangaraj R, Alva RC et al. Interstitial high-dose-rate brachytherapy using cobalt-60 source for cervical cancer: dosimetric and clinical outcomes from a single institute. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2020; 12: 351-355.

26 

Tan PW, Koh VY, Tang JI. Educational article Outpatient combined intracavitary and interstitial cervical brachytherapy: barriers and solutions to implementation of a successful programme–A single institutional experience. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2015; 3: 259-263.

27 

Murakami N, Kobayashi K, Shima S et al. A hybrid technique of intracavitary and interstitial brachytherapy for locally advanced cervical cancer: initial outcomes of a single-institute experience. BMC Cancer 2019; 19: 221.

Copyright: © 2024 Termedia Sp. z o. o. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
 
Quick links
© 2024 Termedia Sp. z o.o.
Developed by Bentus.