FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2319128533> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2319128533 endingPage "S768" @default.
• W2319128533 startingPage "S768" @default.
• W2319128533 abstract "Purpose/Objective(s)Daily cone beam CT scans (CBCTs) provide 3D anatomic image guidance for high-precision radiation delivery in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. The daily CBCT may show non-optimal PTV coverage thereby warranting maneuvers such as changes in bladder or rectal volumes, followed by a repeat CBCT (rCBCT) to assess these changes. The purpose of this study is to prospectively determine the reasons for rCBCTs during image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) for prostate cancer and if these studies were clinically relevant.Materials/MethodsBetween 4/11/11 and 9/19/11, a total of 674 patients underwent IGRT for prostate cancer using daily CBCT scans at our multi-site institution. A shrinking field technique was typically used to deliver a dose of 8100 cGy in 45 fractions for definitive prostate treatment or 7200 cGy in 40 fractions in the post-op setting. A physician reviewed each CBCT on a daily basis, and the images were compared to CT-simulation images of the prostate, gold fiducial markers, bony anatomy, seminal vesicles, bladder, and rectum. If the initial CBCT was considered unacceptable, some maneuver to improve the anatomic geometry was performed, followed by a rCBCT. Any patient receiving a rCBCT was prospectively evaluated with documentation of objective criteria for the reason for rCBCT and outcome of the subsequent scan relative to that reason. Objective criteria categories for rCBCT included issues relating to the bladder, rectum, small bowel, PTV coverage and all other.ResultsA total of 24,381 CBCT scans were performed on 674 patients. Of these, 2635 (10.8%) were rCBCTs, with 2425 (92.0%) of these repeated only once, 204 (7.7%) repeated twice, and 6 (0.2%) repeated three times. The reason for the repeat scans was a bladder issue in 1273 cases (48.3%), rectal issue in 886 cases (33.6%), PTV coverage issue in 494 cases (18.7%), small bowel issue in 17 cases (0.6%), and other issue in 52 cases (2.0%). A number of patients had multiple reasons for rCBCT, most commonly bladder and rectal issues in 341 cases (12.9%). The rCBCT resolved the original problem and the patient underwent treatment in 2100 cases (79.7%). In 244 instances (9.3%), the patient was not treated after the first rCBCT due to an unresolved or new issue on rCBCT. In 293 cases (11.1% of repeat scans), the patient was treated despite an unresolved or new issue on the repeat scan. 24 patients (0.9%) underwent a repeat CT-simulation due to repetitive CBCTs.ConclusionsOver 97% of rCBCT scans in patients undergoing IMRT/IGRT for prostate cancer were performed for bladder, rectal, or PTV coverage issues. Although 89.0% of rCBCTs provided clinically relevant information which altered the treatment algorithm, this study clearly demonstrates the need for protocols to enhance assessment of the pelvic anatomy prior to CBCT to reduce the incidence of such studies. Purpose/Objective(s)Daily cone beam CT scans (CBCTs) provide 3D anatomic image guidance for high-precision radiation delivery in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. The daily CBCT may show non-optimal PTV coverage thereby warranting maneuvers such as changes in bladder or rectal volumes, followed by a repeat CBCT (rCBCT) to assess these changes. The purpose of this study is to prospectively determine the reasons for rCBCTs during image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) for prostate cancer and if these studies were clinically relevant. Daily cone beam CT scans (CBCTs) provide 3D anatomic image guidance for high-precision radiation delivery in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. The daily CBCT may show non-optimal PTV coverage thereby warranting maneuvers such as changes in bladder or rectal volumes, followed by a repeat CBCT (rCBCT) to assess these changes. The purpose of this study is to prospectively determine the reasons for rCBCTs during image guided radiation therapy (IGRT) for prostate cancer and if these studies were clinically relevant. Materials/MethodsBetween 4/11/11 and 9/19/11, a total of 674 patients underwent IGRT for prostate cancer using daily CBCT scans at our multi-site institution. A shrinking field technique was typically used to deliver a dose of 8100 cGy in 45 fractions for definitive prostate treatment or 7200 cGy in 40 fractions in the post-op setting. A physician reviewed each CBCT on a daily basis, and the images were compared to CT-simulation images of the prostate, gold fiducial markers, bony anatomy, seminal vesicles, bladder, and rectum. If the initial CBCT was considered unacceptable, some maneuver to improve the anatomic geometry was performed, followed by a rCBCT. Any patient receiving a rCBCT was prospectively evaluated with documentation of objective criteria for the reason for rCBCT and outcome of the subsequent scan relative to that reason. Objective criteria categories for rCBCT included issues relating to the bladder, rectum, small bowel, PTV coverage and all other. Between 4/11/11 and 9/19/11, a total of 674 patients underwent IGRT for prostate cancer using daily CBCT scans at our multi-site institution. A shrinking field technique was typically used to deliver a dose of 8100 cGy in 45 fractions for definitive prostate treatment or 7200 cGy in 40 fractions in the post-op setting. A physician reviewed each CBCT on a daily basis, and the images were compared to CT-simulation images of the prostate, gold fiducial markers, bony anatomy, seminal vesicles, bladder, and rectum. If the initial CBCT was considered unacceptable, some maneuver to improve the anatomic geometry was performed, followed by a rCBCT. Any patient receiving a rCBCT was prospectively evaluated with documentation of objective criteria for the reason for rCBCT and outcome of the subsequent scan relative to that reason. Objective criteria categories for rCBCT included issues relating to the bladder, rectum, small bowel, PTV coverage and all other. ResultsA total of 24,381 CBCT scans were performed on 674 patients. Of these, 2635 (10.8%) were rCBCTs, with 2425 (92.0%) of these repeated only once, 204 (7.7%) repeated twice, and 6 (0.2%) repeated three times. The reason for the repeat scans was a bladder issue in 1273 cases (48.3%), rectal issue in 886 cases (33.6%), PTV coverage issue in 494 cases (18.7%), small bowel issue in 17 cases (0.6%), and other issue in 52 cases (2.0%). A number of patients had multiple reasons for rCBCT, most commonly bladder and rectal issues in 341 cases (12.9%). The rCBCT resolved the original problem and the patient underwent treatment in 2100 cases (79.7%). In 244 instances (9.3%), the patient was not treated after the first rCBCT due to an unresolved or new issue on rCBCT. In 293 cases (11.1% of repeat scans), the patient was treated despite an unresolved or new issue on the repeat scan. 24 patients (0.9%) underwent a repeat CT-simulation due to repetitive CBCTs. A total of 24,381 CBCT scans were performed on 674 patients. Of these, 2635 (10.8%) were rCBCTs, with 2425 (92.0%) of these repeated only once, 204 (7.7%) repeated twice, and 6 (0.2%) repeated three times. The reason for the repeat scans was a bladder issue in 1273 cases (48.3%), rectal issue in 886 cases (33.6%), PTV coverage issue in 494 cases (18.7%), small bowel issue in 17 cases (0.6%), and other issue in 52 cases (2.0%). A number of patients had multiple reasons for rCBCT, most commonly bladder and rectal issues in 341 cases (12.9%). The rCBCT resolved the original problem and the patient underwent treatment in 2100 cases (79.7%). In 244 instances (9.3%), the patient was not treated after the first rCBCT due to an unresolved or new issue on rCBCT. In 293 cases (11.1% of repeat scans), the patient was treated despite an unresolved or new issue on the repeat scan. 24 patients (0.9%) underwent a repeat CT-simulation due to repetitive CBCTs. ConclusionsOver 97% of rCBCT scans in patients undergoing IMRT/IGRT for prostate cancer were performed for bladder, rectal, or PTV coverage issues. Although 89.0% of rCBCTs provided clinically relevant information which altered the treatment algorithm, this study clearly demonstrates the need for protocols to enhance assessment of the pelvic anatomy prior to CBCT to reduce the incidence of such studies. Over 97% of rCBCT scans in patients undergoing IMRT/IGRT for prostate cancer were performed for bladder, rectal, or PTV coverage issues. Although 89.0% of rCBCTs provided clinically relevant information which altered the treatment algorithm, this study clearly demonstrates the need for protocols to enhance assessment of the pelvic anatomy prior to CBCT to reduce the incidence of such studies." @default.
• W2319128533 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2319128533 creator A5035818956 @default.
• W2319128533 creator A5045829969 @default.
• W2319128533 creator A5048169229 @default.
• W2319128533 creator A5059892813 @default.
• W2319128533 date "2012-11-01" @default.
• W2319128533 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W2319128533 title "The Value of Repeat Cone Beam CT Scans in Image Guided Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer" @default.
• W2319128533 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.07.2056" @default.
• W2319128533 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W2319128533 type Work @default.
• W2319128533 sameAs 2319128533 @default.
• W2319128533 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W2319128533 countsByYear W23191285332020 @default.
• W2319128533 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2319128533 hasAuthorship W2319128533A5035818956 @default.
• W2319128533 hasAuthorship W2319128533A5045829969 @default.
• W2319128533 hasAuthorship W2319128533A5048169229 @default.
• W2319128533 hasAuthorship W2319128533A5059892813 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C121608353 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C126838900 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C19527891 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C2779813781 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C2780192828 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C2989005 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C3018399558 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C3020003399 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C509974204 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C544519230 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConcept C9267231 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C121608353 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C126322002 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C126838900 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C19527891 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C2779813781 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C2780192828 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C2989005 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C3018399558 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C3020003399 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C509974204 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C544519230 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C71924100 @default.
• W2319128533 hasConceptScore W2319128533C9267231 @default.
• W2319128533 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W2319128533 hasLocation W23191285331 @default.
• W2319128533 hasOpenAccess W2319128533 @default.
• W2319128533 hasPrimaryLocation W23191285331 @default.
• W2319128533 hasRelatedWork W1971577712 @default.
• W2319128533 hasRelatedWork W2043618285 @default.
• W2319128533 hasRelatedWork W2044714094 @default.
• W2319128533 hasRelatedWork W2067908064 @default.
• W2319128533 hasRelatedWork W2071082576 @default.
• W2319128533 hasRelatedWork W2347516240 @default.
• W2319128533 hasRelatedWork W2375384739 @default.
• W2319128533 hasRelatedWork W2389858117 @default.
• W2319128533 hasRelatedWork W3183243354 @default.
• W2319128533 hasRelatedWork W70083264 @default.
• W2319128533 hasVolume "84" @default.
• W2319128533 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2319128533 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2319128533 magId "2319128533" @default.
• W2319128533 workType "article" @default.