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
SCImago Journal & Country Rank

4/2020
vol. 12
 
Share:
Share:
more
 
 
abstract:
Original paper

Comparison of catheter reconstruction techniques for the lunar ovoid channels of the VeneziaTM applicator

Jon Hansen
1
,
David Dunkerley
1
,
Kristin Bradley
1
,
Jessica Miller
1
,
Jessie Huang
1

1.
Department of Human Oncology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, USA
J Contemp Brachytherapy 2020; 12, 4: 383–392
Online publish date: 2020/08/21
View full text
Get citation
ENW
EndNote
BIB
JabRef, Mendeley
RIS
Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero
AMA
APA
Chicago
Harvard
MLA
Vancouver
 
Purpose
The aim of this study was to compare catheter reconstruction methods for lunar ovoid channels of the VeneziaTM advanced gynecological applicator (Elekta, Sweden).

Material and methods
Three available lunar ovoid sizes (22, 26, and 30 mm effective diameter) were evaluated. Computed tomography (CT) scans were performed with a dummy wire inserted and with the Flexitron® source position simulator (SPS) at step sizes of 5 mm from the most distal dwell position. Treatment plans were generated in Oncentra® (version 4.5.3) with different catheter reconstruction techniques: centerline reconstruction, tracing a CT dummy wire, using a source path model provided by Elekta, and using the SPS at each planning dwell position. Source position agreement was assessed in registered CT images, and dose differences were calculated with the SPS-based treatment plan as a reference. Finally, dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters were evaluated for clinical plans with the VeneziaTM applicator.

Results
For the most distal dwell position, the manufacturer’s model had the closest agreement with the SPS at 0.6 ±0.3 mm across applicator sizes. Relative to the SPS, maximal dose differences outside of the applicator were between 16-39% for a 0.1 cm3 volume and 3.6-9.1% for a 2.0 cm3 volume. For two clinical plans, volume-based DVH parameters agreed ≤ 3.9%, while deviations ≤ 5.3% were seen for point metrics.

Conclusions
Relative to the SPS-based plan, large local dose discrepancies were reduced, but not eliminated, using the manufacturer’s source path model. The choice of reconstruction technique was found to have relatively limited impact on DVH parameters for regions outside of the vaginal mucosa.

keywords:

Venezia, cervix, catheter reconstruction

 
Quick links
© 2020 Termedia Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved.
Developed by Bentus.
PayU - płatności internetowe