Dosimetric characteristics of the MammoSite RTS, a new breast brachytherapy applicator

Purpose: A new device has been developed with the goal of making breast-conserving therapy more widely available, by making breast brachytherapy as monotherapy simpler and more accurate. This is the first published report on the dosimetric characteristics of this device. Methods and Materials: The e...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics biology, physics, 2002-03, Vol.52 (4), p.1132-1139
Hauptverfasser: Edmundson, Gregory K, Vicini, Frank A, Chen, Peter Y, Mitchell, Christina, Martinez, Alvaro A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose: A new device has been developed with the goal of making breast-conserving therapy more widely available, by making breast brachytherapy as monotherapy simpler and more accurate. This is the first published report on the dosimetric characteristics of this device. Methods and Materials: The experience of a single institution participating in a multi-institutional trial is reported. Twelve patients were enrolled, of whom 8 were treated. Computed tomography scans of all 12 patients were obtained before initiation of treatment. A commercial three-dimensional planning system was used for retrospective detailed analysis of dosimetry, including dose-volume histograms and, in selected patients, skin dose distributions. These data were compared to those of a similar group of patients, analyzed previously, that was treated with interstitial high-dose-rate brachytherapy. Results: Compared with interstitial brachytherapy, the MammoSite device resulted in a treatment dose that was less uniform, with a mean dose homogeneity index of 0.77 vs. 0.93. Coverage and reproducibility were improved, with a mean D90 (minimum dose to 90% of target volume) of 90.0% of prescribed dose (SD 0.5, range: 89.2–90.8%) vs. 69.8% (SD 7.3, range: 61.1–83.5%) for interstitial brachytherapy. Conclusions: Reproducible placement was easily achieved in this very early experience, indicating a much smaller “learning curve” than for interstitial brachytherapy. Because skin doses can be increased with the use of this device, caution is indicated, although simple maneuvers can significantly reduce skin dose.
ISSN:0360-3016
1879-355X
DOI:10.1016/S0360-3016(01)02773-0