1
|
Gejerman G, Goldstein MM, Chao M, Shore N, Lederer J, Crawford ED, Bukkapatnam R, Sylvester J, Orio PF. Barrigel Spacer Injection Technique. Pract Radiat Oncol 2024; 14:e57-e61. [PMID: 37657504 DOI: 10.1016/j.prro.2023.08.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/27/2023] [Revised: 08/07/2023] [Accepted: 08/09/2023] [Indexed: 09/03/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Glen Gejerman
- New Jersey Urology, VillageMD Research Institute, Saddle Brook, New Jersey.
| | - Martin M Goldstein
- New Jersey Urology, VillageMD Research Institute, Saddle Brook, New Jersey
| | - Michael Chao
- Ringwood Private Hospital, East Ringwood, Melbourne, Australia
| | - Neal Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
| | | | | | | | | | - Peter F Orio
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kos M, Nurani R, Costa P, Dabkowski M, da Silva JVF, Zimberg S, Keane J. Multicenter, dual fractionation scheme, single core lab comparison of rectal volume dose reduction following injection of two biodegradable perirectal spacers. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2023; 24:e14086. [PMID: 37376868 PMCID: PMC10562021 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.14086] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/20/2022] [Revised: 05/15/2023] [Accepted: 05/23/2023] [Indexed: 06/29/2023] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE A multicenter, double-arm, central core lab, retrospective study was performed to compare the rectal dosimetry of patients implanted with two injectable, biodegradable perirectal spacers, in conventional fractionation (CF), as well as ultrahypofractionation (UH) treatment plans. METHODS AND MATERIALS Fifty-nine patients were enrolled into the study in five centers: two centers in Europe, which implanted a biodegradable balloon spacer in a total of 24 subjects and three centers in the US, which implanted the SpaceOAR in 35 subjects. Anonymized CTs (pre and post-implantation) were reviewed by the central core lab. For VMAT CF plans rectal V50, V60, V70, and V80 were calculated. For UH plans, a corresponding rectal V22.6, V27.1, V31.37, and V36.25 were established representing 62.5%, 75%, 87.5%, and 100% of the 36.25 Gy prescribed dose. RESULTS For CF VMAT, a comparison between the balloon spacer and the SpaceOAR revealed a significant difference of 33.4% decrease in mean rectal V50 (71.9% vs. 38.5%, p < 0.001), 27.7% in mean rectal V60 (79.6% vs. 51.9%, p < 0.001), 17.1% difference in mean rectal V70 (84.1% vs. 67.0%, p = 0.001), and a significant difference of 3.0% (p = 0.019) in mean rectal V80 (87.2% vs. 84.2%). With UH analysis, the mean rectal dose reduction for the balloon spacer compared to the SpaceOAR was 79.2% and 53.3% for V27.1 (p < 0.001), 84.1% and 68.1% for V31.71 (p = 0.001), and 89.7% and 84.8% for V36.25 (p = 0.012), respectively. CONCLUSION Rectal dosimetry is more favorable for treatment with the balloon spacer compared with SpaceOAR. Further research, particularly in the context of a prospective randomized clinical trial design, is needed to assess the acute and late toxicity experience as well as physician satisfaction with achieving symmetrical implantation, and ease of use in light of increasing clinical use.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Kos
- Northern NV Radiation OncologySpokaneWashingtonUSA
| | | | - Paulo Costa
- CUF Porto InstitutoRua Fonte das Sete BicasPortoPortugal
| | | | | | - Shawn Zimberg
- Advanced Radiation Centers of New YorkLake SuccessNew YorkUSA
| | - John Keane
- Advanced Radiation Centers of New YorkLake SuccessNew YorkUSA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mariados NF, Orio PF, Schiffman Z, Van TJ, Engelman A, Nurani R, Kurtzman SM, Lopez E, Chao M, Boike TP, Martinez AA, Gejerman G, Lederer J, Sylvester JE, Bell G, Rivera D, Shore N, Miller K, Sinayuk B, Steinberg ML, Low DA, Kishan AU, King MT. Hyaluronic Acid Spacer for Hypofractionated Prostate Radiation Therapy: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol 2023; 9:511-518. [PMID: 36757690 PMCID: PMC9912169 DOI: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.7592] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 16.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/18/2022] [Accepted: 11/15/2022] [Indexed: 02/10/2023]
Abstract
Importance Hypofractionated radiation therapy (RT) for prostate cancer has been associated with greater acute grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxic effects compared with conventionally fractionated RT. Objective To evaluate whether a hyaluronic acid rectal spacer could (1) improve rectal dosimetry and (2) affect acute grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects for hypofractionated RT. Design, Setting, and Participants This randomized clinical trial was conducted from March 2020 to June 2021 among 12 centers within the US, Australia, and Spain, with a 6-month follow-up. Adult patients with biopsy-proven, T1 to T2 prostate cancer with a Gleason score 7 or less and prostate-specific antigen level of 20 ng/mL or less (to convert to μg/L, multiply by 1) were blinded to the treatment arms. Of the 260 consented patients, 201 patients (77.3%) were randomized (2:1) to the presence or absence of the spacer. Patients were stratified by intended 4-month androgen deprivation therapy use and erectile quality. Main Outcomes and Measures For the primary outcome, we hypothesized that more than 70% of patients in the spacer group would achieve a 25% or greater reduction in the rectal volume receiving 54 Gy (V54). For the secondary outcome, we hypothesized that the spacer group would have noninferior acute (within 3 months) grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects compared with the control group, with a margin of 10%. Results Of the 201 randomized patients, 8 (4.0%) were Asian, 26 (12.9%) Black, 42 (20.9%) Hispanic or Latino, and 153 (76.1%) White; the mean (SD) age for the spacer group was 68.6 (7.2) years and 68.4 (7.3) years for the control group. For the primary outcome, 131 of 133 (98.5%; 95% CI, 94.7%-99.8%) patients in the spacer group experienced a 25% or greater reduction in rectum V54, which was greater than the minimally acceptable 70% (P < .001). The mean (SD) reduction was 85.0% (20.9%). For the secondary outcome, 4 of 136 patients (2.9%) in the spacer group and 9 of 65 patients (13.8%) in the control group experienced acute grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects (difference, -10.9%; 95% 1-sided upper confidence limit, -3.5; P = .01). Conclusions and Relevance The trial results suggest that rectal spacing with hyaluronic acid improved rectal dosimetry and reduced acute grade 2 or higher GI toxic effects. Rectal spacing should potentially be considered for minimizing the risk of acute grade 2 or higher toxic effects for hypofractionated RT. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04189913.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Peter F Orio
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| | | | | | | | - Rizwan Nurani
- Western Radiation Oncology, Campbell, California
- Interventional Radiation Oncology of California, Campbell
| | | | - Escarlata Lopez
- Vithas La Milagrosa Hospital, Calle de Modesto Lafuente, Madrid, Spain
| | - Michael Chao
- Ringwood Private Hospital, East Victoria, Australia
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Neal Shore
- Carolina Urologic Research Center, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Martin T King
- Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
- Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Williams J, Millan KM, Bolton D, Tan A, Cham CW, Pham T, Pan D, Liu M, Chan Y, Manohar P, Thomas J, Koufogiannis G, Ho H, Guerrieri M, Ng M, Boike T, Macleod C, Joon DL, Foroudi F, Chao M. Hyaluronic acid rectal spacer in EBRT: Usability, safety and symmetry related to user experience. J Med Imaging Radiat Sci 2022; 53:640-647. [PMID: 36202722 DOI: 10.1016/j.jmir.2022.09.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/09/2022] [Revised: 09/02/2022] [Accepted: 09/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To report on the usability, safety, symmetry, and effectiveness of hyaluronic acid (HA) injected between the prostate and the rectum for patients undergoing treatment for prostate cancer with external beam radiotherapy (EBRT), and present a novel definition of rectal spacer symmetry that is reproducible and independent of patient anatomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS 102 consecutive patients with clinical stage of T1c-3b prostate cancer underwent general anaesthesia for fiducial marker insertion and injection of HA into the perirectal space before EBRT. HA safety, symmetry, separation, and usability based on user experience were assessed. RESULTS HA insertion was completed with a 100% success rate independent of user experience, rated as 'easy' or 'very easy' in all cases. There were no postoperative complications reported. The mean (SD) recto-prostatic separation for all patients at the base, midgland and apex were 12 (±2) mm, 11 (±2) mm, and 9 (±1) mm respectively. The mean sagittal length of the implant was 43 (±5) mm. The implant was rated as symmetrical in 98% of cases. The mean rV70Gy was 1.6% (IQR 0.8-3.3%) for patients receiving 78-80Gy. The mean rV53Gy was 2.8% (IQR 1.2-4.8%) for patients receiving 60-62Gy. The median prostate size was 43.5 cc (IQR 32-57). CONCLUSION Injection of HA was able to achieve highly symmetrical recto-prostatic separation, with new users able to produce excellent separation, particularly at the apex, achieving similar dosimetry outcomes as competent and experienced users. HA is safe, easy to use, and significantly reduced mean rV70Gy and rV53Gy compared to non-spacer patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jack Williams
- Albury Wodonga Health, 201 Borella Rd, Albury, NSW 2640, Australia; Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Kevin Mc Millan
- Eastern Health, 5 Arnold Street, Box Hill, VIC 3128, Australia
| | - Damien Bolton
- Austin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia
| | - Alwin Tan
- The Bays Hospital, 262 Main St, Mornington, VIC 3931, Australia
| | - Chee Wee Cham
- The Bays Hospital, 262 Main St, Mornington, VIC 3931, Australia
| | - Trung Pham
- Monash Health, 246, Clayton Rd, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - David Pan
- Monash Health, 246, Clayton Rd, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - Madalena Liu
- Monash Health, 246, Clayton Rd, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - Yee Chan
- Austin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia
| | - Paul Manohar
- Monash Health, 246, Clayton Rd, Clayton, VIC 3168, Australia
| | - Joe Thomas
- Eastern Health, 5 Arnold Street, Box Hill, VIC 3128, Australia
| | - George Koufogiannis
- Ringwood Private Hospital, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Huong Ho
- Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Mario Guerrieri
- Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Michael Ng
- Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Thomas Boike
- Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia; Michigan Health Professionals Radiation Oncology, 4550 Investment Dr, Suite B111, Troy, MI 8098, US
| | - Craig Macleod
- Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia
| | - Daryl Lim Joon
- Austin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia
| | - Farshad Foroudi
- Austin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia
| | - Michael Chao
- Austin Health, 145 Studley Rd, Heidelberg, VIC 3084, Australia; Ringwood Private Hospital, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia; Genesis Care Victoria, 36 Mt Dandenong Rd, Ringwood East, VIC 3135, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Lapierre A, Hennequin C, Beneux A, Belhomme S, Benziane N, Biston MC, Crehange G, de Crevoisier R, Dumas JL, Fawzi M, Lisbona A, Pasquier D, Pelissier S, Graff-Cailleaud P, Pommier P, Sargos P, Simon JM, Supiot S, Tantot F, Chapet O. Highly hypofractionated schedules for localized prostate cancer: Recommendations of the GETUG radiation oncology group. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2022; 173:103661. [PMID: 35341986 DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103661] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/04/2020] [Revised: 01/25/2022] [Accepted: 03/21/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022] Open
Abstract
Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has become treatment option for localized prostate cancer but the evidence base remains incomplete. Several clinical studies, both prospective and retrospective, have been published. However, treatment techniques, target volumes and dose constraints lack consistency between studies. Based on the current available literature, the French Genito-Urinary Group (GETUG) suggests that.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ariane Lapierre
- Ariane Lapierre: Département of de radiothérapie oncologie, centre hospitalier universitaire Lyon Sud, 165, chemin du Grand-Revoyet, 69495 Pierre-Bénite, France; Université de Lyon, 69000 Lyon, France
| | - Christophe Hennequin
- Christophe Hennequin: Department of Radiation Oncology, Hôpital Saint-Louis, 75475, Paris, France
| | - Amandine Beneux
- Amandine Beneux: Service de Physique Médicale et de Radioprotection, centre hospitalier universitaire Lyon Sud, 165, chemin du Grand-Revoyet, 69495 Pierre-Bénite, France
| | - Sarah Belhomme
- Sarah Belhomme: Radiation Oncology Department, Bergonie Institute, 229, cours de l'Argonne, 33076 Bordeaux Cedex, France
| | - Nicolas Benziane
- Nicolas Benziane: Radiation Oncology Department, Bergonie Institute, 229, cours de l'Argonne, 33076 Bordeaux Cedex, France
| | - Marie-Claude Biston
- Marie-Claude Biston: Léon Bérard Cancer Center, University of Lyon, France; Université de Lyon, CREATIS, CNRS UMR5220, Inserm U1044, INSA, Lyon, France
| | - Gilles Crehange
- Gilles Crehange: Département de radiothérapie oncologique, institut Curie, 26, rue d'Ulm, 75005 Paris, France
| | - Renaud de Crevoisier
- Renaud de Crevoisier: Département de Radiothérapie, Centre Eugène Marquis, Rennes
| | - Jean-Luc Dumas
- Jean-luc Dumas: Institut Curie, Radiotherapy department / Medical physics, 26 rue d'Ulm, 75005 PARIS cedex, France
| | - Maher Fawzi
- Maher Fawzi: Institut Curie, Site Saint Cloud, Service de Radiotherapie, 35, rue Dailly 92210 Saint Cloud
| | - Albert Lisbona
- Albert Lisbona: Medical Physics Department Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest, Bd J. Monod, 44805 Saint Herblain France
| | - David Pasquier
- David Pasquier: Academic Department of Radiation Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille; CRIStAL UMR 9189, Lille University
| | | | - Pierre Graff-Cailleaud
- Pierre Graff-Cailleaud: University Institute of Cancer Toulouse-Oncopôle, Toulouse, France
| | - Pascal Pommier
- Pascal Pommier: Radiotherapy Department, Centre Léon Bérard, Lyon, France
| | - Paul Sargos
- Paul Sargos: Radiation Oncology Department, Bergonie Institute, Bordeaux, France
| | - Jean-Marc Simon
- Jean-Marc Simon: Department of Radiotherapy, Sorbonne Université, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, Paris, France
| | - Stéphane Supiot
- Stéphane Supiot: Department of Radiation Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest, Nantes, St-Herblain, France
| | | | - Olivier Chapet
- Département of de radiothérapie oncologie, centre hospitalier universitaire Lyon Sud, 165, chemin du Grand-Revoyet, 69495 Pierre-Bénite, France; Université de Lyon, 69000 Lyon, France
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Radiation Proctitis: The Potential Role of Hyaluronic Acid in the Prevention and Restoration of Any Damage to the Rectal Mucosa among Prostate Cancer Patients Submitted to Curative External Beam Radiotherapy. GASTROENTEROLOGY INSIGHTS 2021. [DOI: 10.3390/gastroent12040043] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Aim: To evaluate if hyaluronic acid reduces proctitis episodes with respect to corticosteroids in prostate cancer patients submitted to radical or adjuvant radiotherapy. Methods: A consecutive series of eligible patients received hyaluronic acid enemas as supportive care (experimental group, from January 2013 to June 2015). A historical group (control group), treated from October 2011 to December 2012, received beclomethasone dipropionate suppositories. We registered each patient’s data regarding acute and chronic proctitis. All patients were treated with static-intensity-modulated radiotherapy coupled to a daily set-up verification with orthogonal anterior–posterior/lateral X-ray pairs. Results: A total of 269 patients, 175 in the experimental group and 94 in the control group, was evaluated; 2 Gy/day (up to a total median dose of 80 Gy) and 2.7 Gy/day (up to a total median dose of 67.5 Gy) fractionation schemes were used for 216 and 53 patients, respectively. All patients had a good tolerance to radiotherapy, reporting no G3 or greater proctitis. No significant difference was reported concerning the total rate of proctitis between the two groups but only with respect to its grade: a higher G2 rate within the control group. There was no correlation between daily dose fractionation and toxicity grade. Conclusions: Hyaluronic acid enemas might be effective in reducing the severity of radiation proctitis.
Collapse
|
7
|
Chapet O, Udrescu C, Bin S, Decullier E, Fenoglietto P, Beneux A, Segui B, Enachescu C, Gaudioz S, Ruffion A, Azria D. Prostate hypofractionated radiotherapy (62Gy at 3.1Gy per fraction) with injection of hyaluronic acid: final results of the RPAH1 study. Br J Radiol 2021; 94:20210242. [PMID: 34282946 PMCID: PMC8764931 DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20210242] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/18/2021] [Revised: 06/16/2021] [Accepted: 06/30/2021] [Indexed: 11/05/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The present multicenter Phase II study evaluated the rate of late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities at 3 years, after hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFR) of prostate cancer with injection of hyaluronic acid (HA) between the prostate and the rectum. METHODS Between 2010 and 2013, 36 patients with low- or intermediate-risk prostate cancer were treated by HFR/IMRT-IGRT. 20 fractions of 3.1 Gy were delivered, 5 days per week for a total dose of 62 Gy. A transperineal injection of 10cc of HA was performed between the rectum and the prostate. Late toxicities were evaluated between 3 and 36 months after the end of treatment (CTCAE v4). RESULTS Median pretreatment prostate-specific antigen was 8 ng ml-1. Among the 36 included patients, 2 were not evaluated because they withdrew the study in the first 3 months of follow-up, and 4 withdrew between 3 and 36 months, the per protocol population was therefore composed.Late grade ≥2 GI toxicities occurred in 4 (12%) patients with 3 (9%) Grade 2 rectal bleedings and one diarrhoea. Therefore, the inefficacy hypothesis following Fleming one-stage design cannot be rejected. None of the patients experienced late Grade 3-4 toxicities. Among the 30 patients completing the 36 months' visit, none still had a grade ≥2 GI toxicity. Late grade ≥2 genitourinary (GU) toxicities occurred in 14 (41%) patients. The most frequent toxicities were dysuria and pollakiuria. Four patients still experienced a grade ≥2 GU toxicity at 36 months.The biochemical relapse rate (nadir +2 ng ml-1) was 6% (2 patients). Overall, HA was very well tolerated with no pain or discomfort. CONCLUSION Despite the inefficacy of HA injection was not rejected, we observed the absence of Grade 3 or 4 rectal toxicity as well as a rate of Grade 2 rectal bleeding below 10% at 36 months of follow-up. Late urinary toxicities are the most frequent but the rate decreases largely at 3 years. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE With an injection of HA, hypofractionated irradiation in 4 weeks is well tolerated with no Grade 3 or 4 GI toxicity and a rate of Grade 2 rectal bleeding below 10% at 36 months of follow-up.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | - Pascal Fenoglietto
- Fédération Universitaire d’Oncologie Radiothérapie d’Occitanie Méditerranée, Institut du Cancer de Montpellier, Univ Montpellier, INSERM U1194 IRCM, Montpellier, France
| | | | | | | | | | | | - David Azria
- Fédération Universitaire d’Oncologie Radiothérapie d’Occitanie Méditerranée, Institut du Cancer de Montpellier, Univ Montpellier, INSERM U1194 IRCM, Montpellier, France
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Hydrodistension - A New Surgical Way in Transgender Surgery. J Sex Med 2021; 18:1134-1140. [PMID: 34052163 DOI: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2021.03.011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/02/2020] [Revised: 03/05/2021] [Accepted: 03/17/2021] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Creating the neovaginal canal in transwomen is one of the most delicate steps of Genital Gender Affirming Surgery (GGAS). Injury to the rectum is a rare but serious complication that can lead to further surgery and even creation of a colostomy. AIM Implementation of a novel hydrospacing technique (HST) based on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS)-guided hydrodistension. METHODS Between June 2018 and June 2020 54 transwomen received GGAS with HST. Immediately before GGAS transperineal hydrodistension was performed using a TSK-Supra-Needle (20 Gauge, 120 mm length), that was placed under direct TRUS-guided visual control between Denonvilliers' fascia and the anterior rectal wall. 40 - 60 ml normal saline were administered perineally to separate Denonvilliers' fascia from the anterior rectal wall to create a dissection of at least 20 mm. For better intraoperative visualization the hydrodissected space was also dyed using 2ml of methylenblue while retracting the needle. A retrospectively analysed, clinically and demographically comparable series of 84 transwomen who underwent GGAS between June 2016 and June 2018 served as control group. All 138 surgeries were performed by the same experienced surgeon. OUTCOMES The effect of the novel hydrospacing technique on neovaginal dimensions and operating time. RESULTS Patients in both groups did not differ in baseline patient characteristics such as age and body mass index (HST 35 vs 38 years in control group, P = .44 and body mass index 26 vs 25 kg/m2, P = .73). Vaginal depth and width were significantly larger in the HST subgroup as compared to controls (14.4 cm vs 13.5 cm, P = .01 and 4.2 cm vs 3.8 cm, P < .001). No statistically significant difference occurred in intraoperative rectal injury (n = 0 in HST group, n = 2 in control group, P = .26). Median total OR-time was comparable for GGAS including HST before vaginoplasty to standard technique (211 minutes for HST vs 218 minutes; P = 0.19). CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS The proposed additional surgical step during GGAS is minimally invasive and safe, simplifies GGAS and potentially helps to avoid complications such as rectal injury. STRENGTH & LIMITATIONS Single-surgeon series, limited follow-up time and no prospective randomization. CONCLUSION HST is a safe and feasible procedure, which facilitates a safe preparation of the neovaginal canal during male to female GGAS. Panic A, Rahmani N, Kaspar C, et al. Transrectal Ultrasound Guided Hydrodistension - A New Surgical Way in Transgender Surgery. J Sex Med 2021;18:1135-1141.
Collapse
|
9
|
Kim SH, Ding K, Rao A, He J, Bhutani MS, Herman JM, Narang A, Shin EJ. EUS-guided hydrogel microparticle injection in a cadaveric model. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2021; 22:83-91. [PMID: 34028956 PMCID: PMC8200447 DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13266] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/08/2021] [Revised: 03/31/2021] [Accepted: 04/10/2021] [Indexed: 01/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS A potential method to reduce gastrointestinal toxicity during radiation therapy in pancreatic head cancer is to create a physical space between the head of the pancreas (HOP) and the duodenum. To date, there have been early reports on the feasibility of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided hydrogel injection into the interface between the HOP and the duodenum to increase the peri-pancreatic space for radiotherapy. We aimed to evaluate the technical feasibility of EUS-guided hydrogel injection for the creation of space at the peri-pancreatic interface in a cadaveric model. METHODS Baseline abdominal computerized tomography (CT) was performed on three unfixed cadaveric specimens. The hydrogel was injected transduodenally into the interface between the HOP and duodenum using linear-array EUS and a 19G needle for fine needle aspiration (FNA). This procedure was repeated along the length of the HOP. CT imaging and gross dissection were performed after the procedure to confirm the localization of the hydrogel and to measure the distance between the HOP and the duodenum. RESULTS All cadavers underwent successful EUS-guided injection of the hydrogel. Cadavers 1, 2, and 3 were injected with 9.5, 27, and 10 cc of hydrogel, respectively; along the HOP, the formation of the peri-pancreatic space was a maximum size of 11.77, 13.20, and 12.89 mm, respectively. The hydrogel injections were clearly visualized as hyperechoic bullae during EUS and on post-procedure CT images without any artifacts in all cases. CONCLUSIONS We demonstrated that EUS-guided delivery of hydrogel is feasible, and that it increases the peri-pancreatic space in a cadaveric model. The polyethylene glycol (PEG) hydrogel was clearly visible on EUS and CT, without significant artifacts. This may lead to new treatment approaches for pancreatic carcinomas.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Seong-Hun Kim
- Department of Internal Medicine, Research Institute of Clinical Medicine of Jeonbuk National University-Biomedical Research Institute of Jeonbuk National University Hospital, Jeonju-si, Jeollabuk-do, Republic of Korea
| | - Kai Ding
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Avani Rao
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Jin He
- Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Manoop S Bhutani
- Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatology and Nutrition, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Joseph M Herman
- Radiation Oncology, Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell, Lake Success, NY, USA
| | - Amol Narang
- Department of Radiation Oncology and Molecular Radiation Sciences, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Eun Ji Shin
- Division of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Subdermal injection of hyaluronic acid to decrease skin toxicity from radiation delivered with low-dose-rate brachytherapy for cancer patients. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2019; 11:14-20. [PMID: 30911305 PMCID: PMC6431100 DOI: 10.5114/jcb.2019.82770] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/08/2018] [Accepted: 01/16/2019] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Purpose To study the feasibility of hyaluronic acid (HA) injection to increase the distance between skin and radioactive sources, and dose reduction of skin during low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy. Material and methods: A total of 11 patients with subdermal malignant tumors were enrolled in this study. HA was injected after I-125 seed implantation, and dosimetric parameters were calculated by a brachytherapy treatment planning system (BTPS). The distance of the new space between radioactive sources and skin was measured on computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Clinical signs were observed and followed up for every patient. Results After HA injection, the average of newly generated maximum distance was 1.0 cm along the entire length of the tumor. The D90 and V100 did not significantly change for tumors before or after injection (p = 0.39, p = 0.50, respectively). The maximum dose to a relatively small volume (0.1 cc) of the skin (OAR-Max) decreased from 100.66 Gy to 61.20 Gy (p < 0.05), and the mean skin dose (OAR-Mean) decreased from 49.20 Gy to 17.27 Gy (p < 0.05) after injection. On follow-up CT and MRI, HA was quite stable in shape and position for nearly 6 months. Conclusions Our study results showed that an additional 1.0 cm distance between the radioactive source and skin could be induced by HA injection in patients with subdermal tumor, and this distance could significantly decrease the skin dose in LDR brachytherapy. In addition, no obvious toxicity and side effects were produced by HA injection. Therefore, hyaluronic acid injection is a safe and effective technique.
Collapse
|
11
|
Rohr A, Werth K, Shen X, Collins Z, Fishback S, Jones J, Ash R, Williams V. MRI findings of absorbable hydrogel spacer for prostate cancer therapy: a pictorial review. Abdom Radiol (NY) 2019; 44:247-251. [PMID: 29967983 DOI: 10.1007/s00261-018-1685-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/30/2022]
Abstract
Prior studies have shown that dose-escalated radiation therapy for prostate cancer improves clinical outcomes. However, this is associated with increased rectal toxicity. Hydrogel spacer for prostate cancer therapy is an effective way of decreasing rectal toxicity in the late post-therapeutic stages. In some occasions, the gel spacer may not be placed symmetrically between the rectum and prostate. There are several forms of a malpositioned spacer, including lateral displacement, rectal wall infiltration, and prostate capsule infiltration. This manuscript is aimed at evaluating appropriately positioned and malpositioned gel spacers, primarily via magnetic resonance imaging. There are limited educational imaging guides that address what radiologists should evaluate on post-spacer placement imaging. This pictorial review will specifically evaluate post-injection pitfalls such as asymmetry, rectal wall infiltration, and subcapsular injection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aaron Rohr
- Department of Interventional Radiology, University of Stanford, 300 Pasteur Drive, H3531, Stanford, CA, 94305, USA.
| | - Kyle Werth
- Department of Radiology, University of Kansas Health Systems, Kansas City, USA
| | - Xinglei Shen
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Kansas Health Systems, Kansas City, USA
| | - Zachary Collins
- Department of Radiology, University of Kansas Health Systems, Kansas City, USA
| | - Shelby Fishback
- Department of Radiology, University of Kansas Health Systems, Kansas City, USA
| | - Jill Jones
- Department of Radiology, University of Kansas Health Systems, Kansas City, USA
| | - Ryan Ash
- Department of Radiology, University of Kansas Health Systems, Kansas City, USA
| | - Vanessa Williams
- Department of Radiology, University of Kansas Health Systems, Kansas City, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Leiker AJ, Desai NB, Folkert MR. Rectal radiation dose-reduction techniques in prostate cancer: a focus on the rectal spacer. Future Oncol 2018; 14:2773-2788. [PMID: 29939069 DOI: 10.2217/fon-2018-0286] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. External beam radiotherapy by a variety of methods is a standard treatment option with excellent disease control. However, acute and late rectal side effects remain a limiting concern in intensification of therapy in higher-risk patients and in efforts to reduce treatment burden in others. A number of techniques have emerged that allow for high-radiation dose delivery to the prostate with reduced risk of rectal toxicity, including image-guided intensity-modulated radiation therapy, endorectal balloons and various forms of rectal spacers. Image-guided radiation therapy, either intensity-modulated radiation therapy or stereotactic ablative radiation therapy, in conjunction with a rectal spacer, is an efficacious means to reduce acute and long-term rectal toxicity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrew J Leiker
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 2280 Inwood Road, Dallas, TX 75390-9303, USA
| | - Neil B Desai
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 2280 Inwood Road, Dallas, TX 75390-9303, USA
| | - Michael R Folkert
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, 2280 Inwood Road, Dallas, TX 75390-9303, USA
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Cosset JM, Créhange G. Curiethérapie prostatique de rattrapage : solution pour les rechutes localisées après irradiation ? Cancer Radiother 2017; 21:799-803. [DOI: 10.1016/j.canrad.2017.04.009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/28/2017] [Revised: 04/03/2017] [Accepted: 04/18/2017] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|