Analysis of fiducials implanted during EUS for patients with localized rectal cancer receiving high-dose rate endorectal brachytherapy

EUS-guided placement of fiducial markers for image-guided radiotherapy in gastrointestinal tumors: A critical appraisal

We present here a new chapter of the series of papers on how to perform specific EUS techniques. In this manuscript, we discuss on how to perform EUS-guided placement of fiducial markers in gastrointestinal tumors. The aim is to present the scientific evidence of fiducials placement before radiation therapy, including an accurate revision of the literature, to give some advices on the technical approach, and to discuss Pros and Cons from the point of view of gastroenterologists and radiation oncologist.

Accurate surgical navigation with real-time tumor tracking in cancer surgery

In the past decades, image-guided surgery has evolved rapidly. In procedures with a relatively fixed target area, like neurosurgery and orthopedics, this has led to improved patient outcomes. In cancer surgery, intraoperative guidance could be of great benefit to secure radical resection margins since residual disease is associated with local recurrence and poor survival. However, most tumor lesions are mobile with a constantly changing position. Here, we present an innovative technique for real-time tumor tracking in cancer surgery. In this study, we evaluated the feasibility of real-time tumor tracking during rectal cancer surgery. The application of real-time tumor tracking using an intraoperative navigation system is feasible and safe with a high median target registration accuracy of 3 mm. This technique allows oncological surgeons to obtain real-time accurate information on tumor location, as well as critical anatomical information. This study demonstrates that real-time tumor tracking is feasible and could potentially decrease positive resection margins and improve patient outcome.

Feasibility of Gold Fiducial Markers as a Surrogate for Gross Tumor Volume Position in Image-Guided Radiation Therapy of Rectal Cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the feasibility of fiducial markers as a surrogate for gross tumor volume (GTV) position in image-guided radiation therapy of rectal cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We analyzed 35 fiducials in 19 patients with rectal cancer who received short-course radiation therapy or long-course chemoradiation therapy. Magnetic resonance imaging examinations were performed before and after the first week of radiation therapy, and daily pre- and postirradiation cone beam computed tomography scans were acquired in the first week of radiation therapy. Between the 2 magnetic resonance imaging examinations, the fiducial displacement relative to the center of gravity of the GTV (COG_GTV) and the COG_GTV displacement relative to bony anatomy were determined. Using the cone beam computed tomography scans, inter- and intrafraction fiducial displacement relative to bony anatomy were determined.

RESULTS

The systematic error of the fiducial displacement relative to the COG_GTV was 2.8, 2.4, and 4.2 mm in the left-right, anterior-posterior (AP), and craniocaudal (CC) directions, respectively. Large interfraction systematic errors of up to 8.0 mm and random errors up to 4.7 mm were found for COG_GTV and fiducial displacements relative to bony anatomy, mostly in the AP and CC directions. For tumors located in the mid and upper rectum, these errors were up to 9.4 mm (systematic) and 5.6 mm (random) compared with 4.9 mm and 2.9 mm for tumors in the lower rectum. Systematic and random errors of the intrafraction fiducial displacement relative to bony anatomy were ≤2.1 mm in all directions.

CONCLUSIONS

Large interfraction errors of the COG_GTV and the fiducials relative to bony anatomy were found. Therefore, despite the observed fiducial displacement relative to the COG_GTV, the use of fiducials as a surrogate for GTV position reduces the required margins in the AP and CC directions for a GTV boost using image-guided radiation therapy of rectal cancer. This reduction in margin may be larger in patients with tumors located in the mid and upper rectum compared with the lower rectum.

EUS-guided fiducial marker placement for radiotherapy in rectal cancer: feasibility of two placement strategies and four fiducial types

Background and study aims  To facilitate image guidance during radiotherapy of rectal cancer, we investigated the feasibility of fiducial marker placement. This study aimed to evaluate technical success rate and safety of two endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided placement strategies and four fiducial types for rectal cancer patients. Patients and methods  This prospective multicenter study included 20 participants who were scheduled to undergo rectal cancer treatment with neoadjuvant short-course radiotherapy or chemoradiation. EUS-guided endoscopy was used for fiducial placement at the tumor site (n = 10) or in the mesorectal fat and in the tumor (n = 10). Four fiducial types were used (Visicoil 0.75 mm, Visicoil 0.50 mm, Cook, Gold Anchor). The endpoints were technical success rate and retention of fiducials, the latter of which was evaluated on cone-beam computed tomography scans during the first five radiotherapy fractions. Results  A total of 64 fiducials were placed in 20 patients. For each fiducial type, at least three fiducials were successfully placed in all patients. Technical failure consisted of fiducial blockage within the needle (n = 2) and ejection of two preloaded fiducials at once (n = 4). No serious adverse events were reported. In three patients, one of the fiducials was misplaced without clinical consequences; two in the prostate and one in the intraperitoneal cavity. After a median time of 17 days after placement (range 7 - 47 days), a total of 42/64 (66 %) fiducials were still present (24/44 intratumoral vs. 18/20 mesorectal fiducials, P  = 0.009). Conclusions  Placement of fiducials in rectal cancer patients is feasible, however, retention rates for intratumoral fiducials were lower (55 %) than for mesorectal fiducials (90 %).

Rectal Endoscopic Ultrasound in Clinical Practice

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) is routinely utilized for evaluation of disorders of the lower gastrointestinal tract. In this review, we summarize the current status of rectal EUS in clinical practice and describe recent developments in diagnostic and therapeutic rectal EUS.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent guidelines recommend rectal EUS for rectal cancer staging as a second line modality in cases where MRI is contraindicated. Forward-viewing echoendoscopes and through the scope EUS miniprobes allow for EUS imaging of lesions through the entire colon and for evaluation beyond stenoses or luminal narrowings. EUS can be used to assess perianal disease and drain pelvic abscess associated with IBD, along with newer applications currently under investigation. For rectal varices, EUS can confirm the diagnosis, assess the optimal site for banding, guide therapy placement with sclerotherapy and/or coils, and assess response to treatment by confirming absence of flow. Therapeutic rectal EUS is emerging as a promising modality for drainage of pelvic fluid collection drainage and fiducial placement for rectal or prostatic cancer. Drug delivery mechanisms and substances that may increase the scope of therapy with rectal EUS are in varying stages of development. Rectal EUS continues to be an important modality for evaluation of benign and malignant disorders of the lower gastrointestinal tract, although its use as a cancer staging modality has declined due to improvements in MRI technology. Various technologies to enhance ultrasound imaging and for therapeutics have been developed that have or may contribute to expanded indications for rectal EUS.

MRI visibility of gold fiducial markers for image-guided radiotherapy of rectal cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

A GTV boost is suggested to result in higher complete response rates in rectal cancer patients, which is attractive for organ preservation. Fiducials may offer GTV position verification on (CB)CT, if the fiducial-GTV spatial relationship can be accurately defined on MRI. The study aim was to evaluate the MRI visibility of fiducials inserted in the rectum.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We tested four fiducial types (two Visicoil types, Cook and Gold Anchor), inserted in five patients each. Four observers identified fiducial locations on two MRI exams per patient in two scenarios: without (scenario A) and with (scenario B) (CB)CT available. A fiducial was defined to be consistently identified if 3 out of 4 observers labeled that fiducial at the same position on MRI. Fiducial visibility was scored on an axial and sagittal T2-TSE sequence and a T1 3D GRE sequence.

RESULTS

Fiducial identification was poor in scenario A for all fiducial types. The Visicoil 0.75 and Gold Anchor were the most consistently identified fiducials in scenario B with 7 out of 9 and 8 out of 11 consistently identified fiducials in the first MRI exam and 2 out of 7 and 5 out of 10 in the second MRI exam, respectively. The consistently identified Visicoil 0.75 and Gold Anchor fiducials were best visible on the T1 3D GRE sequence.

CONCLUSION

The Visicoil 0.75 and Gold Anchor fiducials were the most visible fiducials on MRI as they were most consistently identified. The use of a registered (CB)CT and a T1 3D GRE MRI sequence is recommended.

Does setup on rectal wall improve rectal cancer boost radiotherapy?

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer patients that show a pathological complete response (pCR) after neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy, have better prognosis. To increase pCR rates several studies escalate the tumor irradiation dose. However, due to lacking tumor contrast on online imaging techniques, no direct tumor setup can be performed and large boost margins are needed to ensure tumor coverage. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of performing a setup on rectal wall for rectal cancer boost radiotherapy, thereby using rectal wall nearby the tumor as tumor position surrogate.

METHODS

For sixteen patients, daily MRI's were performed during 1 week of radiotherapy. On each of these images, tumor and rectum were delineated. Residual displacements were determined per surface voxel after setup on bony anatomy or nearby rectal wall and setup errors for both setups were compared. Furthermore for every rectal wall voxel nearby the tumor, displacement was compared with the closest tumor point and correlation was determined.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) setup error was 2.7 mm (3.3 mm) and 2.2 mm (3.2 mm) after setup on bony anatomy and rectal wall respectively. Nevertheless, similar PTV-margin estimates i.e. 95th percentile distances, were found; 8.0 mm. Also, a merely moderate correlation; ρ = 0.66 was found between rectal wall and tumor displacement. Further investigation into tumor and rectal mobility differences showed that the rectal wall lacks appropriate anatomical landmarks to find true displacements, especially to capture motion along the rectal wall.

CONCLUSIONS

Setup on rectal wall slightly reduces mean setup errors but requires a similar PTV-margin as compared to setup on bony anatomy. Rectal mobility might be similar to tumor mobility, but due the absence of anatomical landmarks in the rectum, displacements along the rectal wall are not detected on current online imaging. Therefore, to further reduce tumor position uncertainties, direct or indirect online tumor visualization is needed.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fiducial marker placement for image-guided radiation therapy without fluoroscopy: safety and technical feasibility

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fiducial marker placement for image-guided radiation treatment (IGRT) is becoming more widespread. Most case series report the procedure performed using fluoroscopy for spatial geometry although the benefits of this are unclear. The aim of our study is to report the technical feasibility, safety, and migration rate of fiducial marker placement in a large cohort of patients with gastrointestinal malignancies who underwent EUS-guided fiducial marker placement for IGRT without fluoroscopy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed on all patients referred for EUS-guided fiducial marker placement from 08/1/07 to 7/31/14 at Moffitt Cancer Center.

RESULTS

During the study period, 514 patients underwent placement of 1093 gold fiducial markers under EUS-guidance. Two hundred and forty patients with esophageal/gastro-esophageal junction cancer had 405 fiducials placed. In 188 patients with pancreatic ancer, 510 fiducials were placed. In 54 patients with rectal cancer, 103 fiducials were placed and 32 patients had 75 fiducials placed into other gastrointestinal tract lesions. Minor bleeding, which resolved spontaneously, occurred in two patients. Technical difficulty in placing fiducials was noted in 18 patients. Intraprocedural fiducial migration was noted in two patients and only 2/1093 fiducials (.002%) in two esophageal patients migrated as noted on simulation computed tomography scan.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-guided fiducial marker placement without fluoroscopy is technically feasible and safe. There were minimal intraprocedure/post-procedure complications. Imaging at the time of simulation also revealed the migration rate to be extremely low. These results may allow for more widespread adoption of EUS-guided fiducial marker placement.

Endoscopic ultrasound-fine needle injection for oncological therapy

The minimal invasiveness and precision of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has lead to both its widespread use as a diagnostic and staging modality for gastrointestinal and pancreaticobiliary malignancies, and to its expanding role as a therapeutic modality. EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis is now a well-accepted modality for palliation of pain in patients with pancreatic cancer. EUS-guided ablation, brachytherapy, fiducial marker placement, and antitumor agent injection have been described as methods of performing minimally invasive oncological therapy. EUS-fine needle injection may be performed as adjunctive, alternative, or palliative treatment. This review summarizes the studies to date that have described these methods. A literature search using the PubMed/MEDLINE databases was performed. While most published studies to date are limited with disappointing outcomes, the concept of a role of EUS in oncological therapy seems promising.