2004
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2003.08.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impact of volume and location of irradiated rectum wall on rectal blood loss after radiotherapy of prostate cancer

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
37
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 80 publications
(39 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
1
37
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In the available literature, no correlation between rectal toxicity and exposure with doses of less than 40 Gy was observed. 29,30 We extended the analysis to compare the volume of the rectum that receives 100% of the prescription dose, according to studies of Carlson et al 23 No significant differences (p = 0.08) were found in the total volume of organ that receives the prescribed 76.32 Gy (on average, slightly less than 2 cc in both cases); however, these differences become statistically significant (p = 0.007) when we study the relative volume (in %) of the organ receiving 100% of the prescription dose, because the total volume appreciably oscillates (by a factor of 2) if we evaluate the entire rectum or the rectal wall. This result coincides well with Kusumoto et al 31 because they demonstrated that the absolute volume DVHs can be used for evaluating rectal toxicity because it depends less than that of relative DVHs on the contouring methods used for high dose levels.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the available literature, no correlation between rectal toxicity and exposure with doses of less than 40 Gy was observed. 29,30 We extended the analysis to compare the volume of the rectum that receives 100% of the prescription dose, according to studies of Carlson et al 23 No significant differences (p = 0.08) were found in the total volume of organ that receives the prescribed 76.32 Gy (on average, slightly less than 2 cc in both cases); however, these differences become statistically significant (p = 0.007) when we study the relative volume (in %) of the organ receiving 100% of the prescription dose, because the total volume appreciably oscillates (by a factor of 2) if we evaluate the entire rectum or the rectal wall. This result coincides well with Kusumoto et al 31 because they demonstrated that the absolute volume DVHs can be used for evaluating rectal toxicity because it depends less than that of relative DVHs on the contouring methods used for high dose levels.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The prostate, entire seminal vesicles and proximal seminal vesicles were delineated on each axial slice on the planning computer. The definition of the proximal seminal vesicles was taken from the literature [20]. Since the volume of the rectum increased to a great extent with a rectal balloon in place, compared to the volume of the rectum with no rectal balloon, the rectal wall volume was outlined.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Rectal toxicity following external beam irradiation of prostate cancer correlates with radiation dose, exposed rectal wall volume, in particular with the percentage of rectal volume included in the intermediate and high dose volume [1,16,20,27,28]. Efforts in optimizing external beam radiation to the prostate are aiming to increase the total dose applied to the prostate while minimizing the delivered dose to the organs at risk, e.g., the rectum [5,6,13,25].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…ScHARR brings together a wide range of medical-and health-related disciplines including public health, general practice, mental health, epidemiology, health economics, management sciences, medical statistics, operational research and information science. 67.5 (21.9) 0.13, mean (SD) dose to posterior rectum (Gy) 35.3 (8.6), mean (SD) dose to anterior rectum (Gy) 74.8 (1.4). Planning process combined two phases, a boost to the prostate and a pelvic treatment The initial boost delivers 16 Gy over eight fractions and it is followed by a 6 MV X-ray eight-field coplanar inverse planning IMRT technique delivering an additional 60 Gy over 30 fractions to the prostate (76 Gy total) and 54 Gy over 30 fractions to the SVs and PNs.…”
Section: About Scharrmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…65 However, increased dose can increase toxicity, as has been shown in RCTs of dose escalation. 66,67 Doses upward of 78-80 Gy are difficult to achieve when using 3DCRT, due to the unacceptable risk of side effects. 68 The benefit of IMRT is largely related to the avoidance of side effects of radiation.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%