J Contemp Brachytherapy. 2021 Jun;13(3):254-262. doi: 10.5114/jcb.2021.105944. Epub 2021 May 6.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Prostate cancer with median lobe hyperplasia (MLH) is a relative contraindication for permanent prostate brachytherapy (PPB) because of an increased risk of post-implant dysuria and technical difficulties associated with achieving stability while implanting within the intravesical tissue. We examined treatment outcome, seed migration, and urination disorders after treat ment in MLH patients in order to determine to what degree MLH implants could be stabilized.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between March 2007 and December 2016, 32 patients had MLH identified radiologically on magnetic resonance imaging, and 193 patients did not have MLH (non-MLH). All patients were treated with loose seeds. In this study, seed migration was defined as a seed distant from the target (≥ 1.5 cm) and/or with no dosimetric contribution to the target. The MLH patients were divided into 2 MLH groups of mild (< 10 mm) and severe (≥ 10 mm) MLH by measuring the distance between the posterior transitional zone and the prostatic tissue protruding into the bladder. We retrospectively analyzed seed migration, dose-volume histograms (DVH), and genitourinary toxicity.
RESULTS: MLH was classified as mild in 24 patients and severe in 8. Seed migration occurred in 61 (31.6%) of 193 non-MLH patients and 10 (31.5%) of 32 MLH patients. Implant seed migration and low-dose level of median lobe tended to be high in severe MLH cases. International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) peaked one month after implantation, but then resolved slowly and returned to around the pre-treatment level after one year. There were no severe complications.
CONCLUSIONS: MLH does not appear to be a strong contraindication for low-dose-rate brachytherapy. However, we found that the seed migration and degree of cold spots tended to be higher in severe MLH cases than in others; therefore, close attention when treating severe MLH cases must be paid.
PMID:34122564 | PMC:PMC8170528 | DOI:10.5114/jcb.2021.105944
No comments:
Post a Comment