On verification of hyperthermia treatment planning for cervical carcinoma patients.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to verify hyperthermia treatment planning calculations by means of measurements performed during hyperthermia treatments. The calculated specific absorption rate (SAR(calc)) was compared with clinically measured SAR values, during 11 treatments in seven cervical carcinoma patients. METHODS: Hyperthermia treatments were performed using the 70 MHz AMC-4 waveguide system. Temperatures were measured using multisensor thermocouple probes. One invasive thermometry catheter in the cervical tumour and two non-invasive catheters in the vagina were used. For optimal tissue contact and fixation of the catheters, a gynaecological tampon was inserted, moisturized with distilled water (4 treatments), or saline (6 treatments) for better thermal contact. During one treatment no tampon was used. At the start of treatment the temperature rise (DeltaT(meas)) after a short power pulse was measured, which is proportional to SAR(meas). The SAR(calc) along the catheter tracks was extracted from the calculated SAR distribution and compared with the DeltaT(meas)-profiles. RESULTS: The correlation between DeltaT(meas) and SAR(calc) was on average R = 0.56 +/- 0.28, but appeared highly dependent on the wetness of the tampon (preferably with saline) and the tissue contact of the catheters. Correlations were strong (R approximately 0.85-0.93) when thermal contact was good, but much weaker (R approximately 0.14-0.48) for cases with poor thermal contact. CONCLUSION: Good correlations between measurements and calculations were found when tissue contact of the catheters was good. The main difficulties for accurate verification were of clinical nature, arising from improper use of the gynaecological tampon. Poor thermal contact between thermocouples and tissue caused measurement artefacts that were difficult to correlate with calculations.     

Prostate thermal therapy with high intensity transurethral ultrasound: the impact of pelvic bone heating on treatment delivery.

PURPOSE: This study was designed to assess pelvic bone temperature during typical treatment regimens of transurethral ultrasound thermal ablation of the prostate to establish guidelines for limiting bone heating. METHODS: Treatment with transurethral planar, curvilinear, and sectored tubular applicators was simulated using an acoustic and biothermal pelvic model that accommodates applicator sweeping, boundary temperature control, and changes in perfusion and attenuation with thermal dose to more accurately model ultrasound energy penetration. The effects of various parameters including power and frequency (5-10 MHz) on bone heating were assessed for a range of prostate cross-sections (3-5 cm) and bone distances (1-3 cm). RESULTS: All devices can produce significant bone heating (temperatures >50 degrees C, thermal dose >240 EM(43 degrees C)) without optimization of applied frequency or power for bone <3 cm from the prostate boundary. In small glands ( approximately 3 cm) increasing operating frequency of curvilinear and planar devices can increase bone temperatures, whereas the tubular applicator can be used at 10 MHz to avoid likely bone damage. In larger prostates (4-5 cm wide) increasing frequency reduces bone heating but can substantially increase treatment time. Lowering power can reduce bone temperature but may increase thermal dose by increasing treatment duration. All applicators can be used to treat glands 4-5 cm with limited bone heating by selecting appropriate power and frequency. CONCLUSIONS: Pubic bone heating during ultrasound thermal therapy of the prostate can be substantial in certain situations. Successful realization of this therapy will require patient-specific treatment planning to optimally determine power and frequency in order to minimize bone heating.     

Treatment of intervention sites of malignant pleural mesothelioma with radiotherapy: a Dutch-Belgian survey.

A survey was performed on the radiotherapy practice of malignant pleural mesothelioma in The Netherlands and Belgium in 2002. Thirty-eight out of 47 centres (81%) responded. Prophylactic radiotherapy to intervention sites is given by 32/38 (84%) centres, with all centres offering palliative radiation. For both prophylactic and palliative indications, all centres use hypo-fractionated schedules. The present study shows that in the radiotherapy community in The Netherlands and in Belgium, a de facto consensus exists that both prophylactic and symptomatic radiotherapy to intervention sites of malignant pleural mesothelioma are effective and that hypo-fractionated schedules should be used.