1
|
Bloemberg J, de Vries M, van Riel LAMJG, de Reijke TM, Sakes A, Breedveld P, van den Dobbelsteen JJ. Therapeutic prostate cancer interventions: a systematic review on pubic arch interference and needle positioning errors. Expert Rev Med Devices 2024:1-17. [PMID: 38946519 DOI: 10.1080/17434440.2024.2374761] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2024] [Accepted: 06/27/2024] [Indexed: 07/02/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION This study focuses on the quantification of and current guidelines on the hazards related to needle positioning in prostate cancer treatment: (1) access restrictions to the prostate gland by the pubic arch, so-called Pubic Arch Interference (PAI) and (2) needle positioning errors. Next, we propose solution strategies to mitigate these hazards. METHODS The literature search was executed in the Embase, Medline ALL, Web of Science Core Collection*, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. RESULTS The literature search resulted in 50 included articles. PAI was reported in patients with various prostate volumes. The level of reported PAI varied between 0 and 22.3 mm, depending on the patient's position and the measuring method. Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy induced the largest reported misplacement errors, especially in the cranio-caudal direction (up to 10 mm) and the largest displacement errors were reported for High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy in the cranio-caudal direction (up to 47 mm), generally increasing over time. CONCLUSIONS Current clinical guidelines related to prostate volume, needle positioning accuracy, and maximum allowable PAI are ambiguous, and compliance in the clinical setting differs between institutions. Solutions, such as steerable needles, assist in mitigating the hazards and potentially allow the physician to proceed with the procedure.This systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The review was registered at Protocols.io (DOI: dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.6qpvr89eplmk/v1).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jette Bloemberg
- Department of Biomechanical Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Martijn de Vries
- Department of Biomechanical Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Luigi A M J G van Riel
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Theo M de Reijke
- Department of Urology, Amsterdam University Medical Centers, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Aimée Sakes
- Department of Biomechanical Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - Paul Breedveld
- Department of Biomechanical Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
| | - John J van den Dobbelsteen
- Department of Biomechanical Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Knaub RJ, Allaf ME, Gorin MA. Freehand Transperineal Prostate Biopsy with Three-Dimensional Ultrasound Organ-Based Tracking. J Endourol 2021; 35:S7-S16. [PMID: 34499547 DOI: 10.1089/end.2021.0569] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Transperineal prostate biopsy carries a significantly lower risk of infectious complications compared with the transrectal approach. We provide a step-by-step description of our current procedural technique for performing transperineal prostate biopsy under local anesthesia. A key component of our technique is the use of a disposable, probe-mounted needle guide that minimizes the number punctures to the perineal skin and allows for continuous needle visualization throughout the procedure. We have paired this device with a novel fusion biopsy platform that utilizes three-dimensional transrectal ultrasound to enable targeting of suspicious lesions found prebiopsy MRI as well as allows for mapping of biopsy core locations for postprocedure review and use at the time of subsequent prostate biopsy or ablation procedures.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ross J Knaub
- Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine, Erie, Pennsylvania, USA
| | - Mohamad E Allaf
- The James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute and Department of Urology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
| | - Michael A Gorin
- Urology Associates and UPMC Western Maryland, Cumberland, Maryland, USA.,Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
King MT, Keyes M, Frank SJ, Crook JM, Butler WM, Rossi PJ, Cox BW, Showalter TN, Mourtada F, Potters L, Stock RG, Kollmeier MA, Zelefsky MJ, Davis BJ, Merrick GS, Orio PF. Low dose rate brachytherapy for primary treatment of localized prostate cancer: A systemic review and executive summary of an evidence-based consensus statement. Brachytherapy 2021; 20:1114-1129. [PMID: 34509378 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2021.07.006] [Citation(s) in RCA: 23] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/21/2021] [Revised: 06/28/2021] [Accepted: 07/14/2021] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE The purpose of this guideline is to present evidence-based consensus recommendations for low dose rate (LDR) permanent seed brachytherapy for the primary treatment of prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS The American Brachytherapy Society convened a task force for addressing key questions concerning ultrasound-based LDR prostate brachytherapy for the primary treatment of prostate cancer. A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify prospective and multi-institutional retrospective studies involving LDR brachytherapy as monotherapy or boost in combination with external beam radiation therapy with or without adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy. Outcomes included disease control, toxicity, and quality of life. RESULTS LDR prostate brachytherapy monotherapy is an appropriate treatment option for low risk and favorable intermediate risk disease. LDR brachytherapy boost in combination with external beam radiation therapy is appropriate for unfavorable intermediate risk and high-risk disease. Androgen deprivation therapy is recommended in unfavorable intermediate risk and high-risk disease. Acceptable radionuclides for LDR brachytherapy include iodine-125, palladium-103, and cesium-131. Although brachytherapy monotherapy is associated with increased urinary obstructive and irritative symptoms that peak within the first 3 months after treatment, the median time toward symptom resolution is approximately 1 year for iodine-125 and 6 months for palladium-103. Such symptoms can be mitigated with short-term use of alpha blockers. Combination therapy is associated with worse urinary, bowel, and sexual symptoms than monotherapy. A prostate specific antigen <= 0.2 ng/mL at 4 years after LDR brachytherapy may be considered a biochemical definition of cure. CONCLUSIONS LDR brachytherapy is a convenient, effective, and well-tolerated treatment for prostate cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martin T King
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.
| | - Mira Keyes
- Department of Radiation Oncology, British Columbia Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
| | - Steven J Frank
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Juanita M Crook
- Department of Radiation Oncology, British Columbia Cancer Agency, University of British Columbia, Kelowna, Canada
| | - Wayne M Butler
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Schiffler Cancer Center, Wheeling Jesuit University, Wheeling, WV
| | - Peter J Rossi
- Calaway Young Cancer Center, Valley View Hospital, Glenwood Springs, CO
| | - Brett W Cox
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL
| | - Timothy N Showalter
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA
| | - Firas Mourtada
- Helen F. Graham Cancer Center & Research Institute, Christiana Care Health System, Newark, DE
| | - Louis Potters
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Hempstead, NY
| | - Richard G Stock
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mt. Sinai Medical Center, New York, NY
| | - Marisa A Kollmeier
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Michael J Zelefsky
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
| | - Brian J Davis
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Gregory S Merrick
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Schiffler Cancer Center, Wheeling Jesuit University, Wheeling, WV
| | - Peter F Orio
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Martin GV, Kudchadker RJ, Bruno TL, Frank SJ, Wang J. Comparison of prostate distortion by inflatable and rigid endorectal MRI coils in permanent prostate brachytherapy imaging. Brachytherapy 2017; 17:298-305. [PMID: 29169971 DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2017.09.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2017] [Revised: 09/08/2017] [Accepted: 09/27/2017] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Abstract
PURPOSE To study the deformation of the prostate by a rigid reusable endorectal coil and a balloon-type endorectal coil (BTC) during MRI of the prostate in brachytherapy imaging. METHODS AND MATERIALS The prostate gland was contoured on 157 MRI scans from 52 prostate cancer patients undergoing brachytherapy. The curvature of the posterior prostate surface deformation was computed as a measure of prostate distortion and compared between scans with a BTC, rigid endorectal coil (REC), or no endorectal coil. For the nine patients who had MRIs with all three endorectal scenarios, a mean prostate deformation vector was also calculated between scenarios using deformable image registration. These measures of prostate distortion were compared with the prostate anterior-to-posterior to left-to-right ratio (AP/LR) on the largest prostate axial slice. RESULTS Significant differences in prostate curvature were found between scans without an endorectal coil versus a REC versus a BTC (p < 0.001). The mean prostate deformation was 3.9 mm due to the BTC and 2.0 mm for the REC (p = 0.012). The mean AP/LR ratio was 0.62 with a BTC versus 0.76 without a coil or 0.73 with a REC (p < 0.001), but no difference existed between scans with a REC versus no coil (p = 0.7). The AP/LR ratio showed moderate correlation with prostate curvature (r = 0.48), and with mean prostate deformation (r = -0.64 to 0.68). CONCLUSIONS The REC caused minimal deformation of the prostate compared with a BTC with adequate MR image quality, and calculation of the cross-sectional AP/LR ratio on the largest axial prostate slice can serve as a simple measure of prostate distortion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Geoffrey V Martin
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Rajat J Kudchadker
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Teresa L Bruno
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Steven J Frank
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | - Jihong Wang
- Division of Radiation Oncology, Department of Radiation Physics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
| |
Collapse
|