Frontiers in oncology · 2025
Low incidence of significant hydrogel spacer rectal wall infiltration: results from an experienced high-volume center.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Woo Sungmin, Becker Anton S, Katz Aaron E, Tong Angela, Vargas Hebert A, Byun David J, Lischalk Jonathan W, Haas Jonathan A, Zelefsky Michael J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the incidence and degree of rectal wall infiltration (RWI) of spacer gel used during prostate radiotherapy among two practitioners experienced in using rectal spacers.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with prostate cancer who received prostate radiotherapy after hydrogel rectal spacer insertion in August 2023-August 2024 by two experienced practitioners were retrospectively included. Post-implant magnetic resonance imaging examinations were evaluated by two radiologists for RWI: 0 (no abnormality), 1 (rectal wall edema), 2 (superficial RWI), and 3 (deep RWI). Scores 2-3 were considered positive for RWI and their location and degree of RWI (radial, longitudinal, and circumferential) were also categorized. Inter-reader agreement was assessed with Cohen's Kappa.
RESULTS: 215 men were included. Agreement was substantial between the radiologists for RWI scores (Kappa, 0.697; 95% confidence interval, 0.594-0.800). RWI scores were 0 in 80.5% (173/215), 1 in 7.9% (17/215), 2 in 10.7% (23/215), and, 3 in 0.9% (2/215) of the men. Altogether, RWI was present (scores 2-3) in 11.6% (25/215), most commonly in the mid-gland and apex with median radial, longitudinal, and circumferential involvement of 3.2 mm, 8.6 mm, and 11.5%. None of these patients demonstrated any significant rectal toxicity.
CONCLUSION: RWI was very uncommon for experienced practitioners. The degree of RWI was focal and not associated with increased complications.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with prostate cancer who received prostate radiotherapy after hydrogel rectal spacer insertion in August 2023-August 2024 by two experienced practitioners were retrospectively included. Post-implant magnetic resonance imaging examinations were evaluated by two radiologists for RWI: 0 (no abnormality), 1 (rectal wall edema), 2 (superficial RWI), and 3 (deep RWI). Scores 2-3 were considered positive for RWI and their location and degree of RWI (radial, longitudinal, and circumferential) were also categorized. Inter-reader agreement was assessed with Cohen's Kappa.
RESULTS: 215 men were included. Agreement was substantial between the radiologists for RWI scores (Kappa, 0.697; 95% confidence interval, 0.594-0.800). RWI scores were 0 in 80.5% (173/215), 1 in 7.9% (17/215), 2 in 10.7% (23/215), and, 3 in 0.9% (2/215) of the men. Altogether, RWI was present (scores 2-3) in 11.6% (25/215), most commonly in the mid-gland and apex with median radial, longitudinal, and circumferential involvement of 3.2 mm, 8.6 mm, and 11.5%. None of these patients demonstrated any significant rectal toxicity.
CONCLUSION: RWI was very uncommon for experienced practitioners. The degree of RWI was focal and not associated with increased complications.