The effect of patient position and treatment technique in conformal treatment of prostate cancer

McLaughlin, Patrick W.; Wygoda, A.; Sahijdak, Walter M.; Sandler, Howard M.; Marsh, Lon H.; Roberson, Peter L.; Haken, Randall K. Ten

doi:10.1016/s0360-3016(99)00207-2

Cited by 56 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Drift was identified only in the inferior direction and typically started approximately 5 min after initiation of the tracking session. Other investigators have reported a paradoxical retraction of the rectum against the sacrum in the prone position (16). Assuming that this is the case, one would expect the prostate to be less susceptible to fluctuations in rectal volume in the prone position.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…These investigators also observed more prostate movement associated with the respiratory cycle in the prone position. In contrast, McLaughlin et al used a CT-based method to assess prostate motion and found no statistically significant differences between the prone and supine position in their series of 10 patients (16). Interestingly, Stroom et al actually observed larger systematic variation of internal prostate location with supine positioning in their series of 15 patients (17).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Electromagnetic Tracking of Intrafraction Prostate Displacement in Patients Externally Immobilized in the Prone Position

Bittner

Butler

Reed

et al. 2010

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Electromagnetic Tracking of Intrafraction Prostate Displacement in Patients Externally Immobilized in the Prone Position

Bittner

Butler

Reed

et al. 2010

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…An EB was recommended in the past by many authors to reduce the prostate mobility [11,13,26,30]. These arguments were transferred to post-radical prostatectomy RT [22,28].…”

Section: Displacement Of the Ctvmentioning

confidence: 99%

Postoperative Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

Pinkawa

Siluschek²,

Gagel³

et al. 2007

Strahlenther Onkol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Zelefsky et al ( 2 ) and McLaughlin et al ( 3 ) demonstrated significantly reduced dose to the rectum and bowel with patients in the prone position compared to supine. Although these publications pertained to 3D conformal radiotherapy, the dosimetric advantage of the prone position has been reported for IMRT, ( 4 ) but there is a greater amount of prostate motion in the prone position compared to the supine position.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intrafraction displacement of prone versus supine prostate positioning monitored by real‐time electromagnetic tracking

Butler

Merrick

Reed

et al. 2013

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implanted radiofrequency transponders were used for real‐time monitoring of the intrafraction prostate displacement between patients in the prone position and the same patients in the supine position. Thirteen patients had three transponders implanted transperineally and were treated prone with a custom‐fitted thermoplastic immobilization device. After collecting data from the last fraction, patients were realigned in the supine position and the displacements of the transponders were monitored for 5–7 minutes. Fourier transforms were applied to the data from each patient to determine periodicity and its amplitude. To remove auto correlation from the stream of displacement data, the distribution of short‐term and long‐term velocity components were calculated from Poincaré plots of paired sequential vector displacements. The mean absolute displacement was significantly greater prone than supine in the superior–inferior (SI) plane (1.2±0.6mm vs. 0.6±0.4mm, p=0.015), but not for the lateral or anterior–posterior (AP) planes. Displacements were least in the lateral direction. Fourier analyses showed the amplitude of respiratory oscillations was much greater for the SI and AP planes in the prone versus the supine position. Analysis of Poincaré plots confirmed greater short‐term variance in the prone position, but no difference in the long‐term variance. The centroid of the implanted transponders was offset from the treatment isocenter by > 5 mm for 1.9% of the time versus 0.8% of the time for supine. These results confirmed significantly greater net intrafraction prostate displacement of patients in the prone position than in the supine position, but most of the difference was due to respiration‐induced motion that was most pronounced in the SI and AP directions. Because the respiratory motion remained within the action threshold and also within our 5 mm treatment planning margins, there is no compelling reason to choose one treatment position over the other.PACS number: 87.50.st

show abstract

The effect of patient position and treatment technique in conformal treatment of prostate cancer

Cited by 56 publications

References 31 publications

Electromagnetic Tracking of Intrafraction Prostate Displacement in Patients Externally Immobilized in the Prone Position

Electromagnetic Tracking of Intrafraction Prostate Displacement in Patients Externally Immobilized in the Prone Position

Postoperative Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

Intrafraction displacement of prone versus supine prostate positioning monitored by real‐time electromagnetic tracking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About