Improving bladder cancer treatment with radiotherapy using separate intensity modulated radiotherapy plans for boost and elective fields

The aim of this study is to investigate to what extent IMRT can decrease the dose to the organs at risk in bladder cancer treatment compared with conformal treatment while making separate treatment plans for the elective field and the boost. Special attention is paid to sparing small intestines. Twenty patients who were treated with the field-in-field technique (FiF) were re-planned with intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) using five and seven beams, respectively. Separate treatment plans were made for the elective field (including the pelvic lymph nodes) and the boost, which enables position correction for bone and tumour separately. The prescribed dose was 40 Gy to the elective field and 55 or 60 Gy to the planning target volume (PTV). For bladder and rectum, V_45Gy and V_55Gy were compared, and for small intestines, V_25Gy and V_40Gy. The dose distribution with IMRT conformed better to the shape of the target. There was no significant difference between the techniques in dose to the healthy bladder. The median V_40Gy of the small intestines decreased from 114 to 66 cc (P = 0.001) with five beam IMRT, and to 55 cc (P = 0.001) with seven beam IMRT compared with FiF. V_45Gy for rectum decreased from 34.2% to 17.5% (P = 0.004) for both five and seven beam plans, while V_55Gy for rectum remained the same. With IMRT, a statistically significant dose decrease to the small intestines can be achieved while covering both tumour and elective PTV adequately.     

Placement of a Magnetic Small Bowel Feeding Tube at the Bedside

Background: Current methods of achieving postpyloric enteral access for feeding are fraught with difficulties, which can markedly delay enteral feeding and cause complications. Bedside tube placement has a low success rate, often requires several radiographs to confirm position, and delays feeding by many hours. Although postpyloric enteral tubes can reliably be placed in interventional radiology (IR), this involves greater resource utilization, delays, cost, and inconvenience. We assessed the utility of bedside enteral tube placement using a magnetic feeding tube (Syncro‐BlueTube; Syncro Medical Innovations, Macon, GA, USA) as a means to facilitate initial tube placement. Methods: We recorded the time to insertion, location of tube, success rate, and need for radiographs in a series of patients given magnetic feeding tubes (n = 46) inserted by our hospitalist service over an 8‐month interval. Results: Of the 46 attempted magnetic tube placements, 76% were successfully placed in the postpyloric position, 13% were in the stomach, and 11% could not be placed. In 83% of the magnetic tubes, only 1 radiograph was needed for confirmation. The median time to placement was 12 minutes (range, 4–120 minutes). Conclusion: The use of a magnetic feeding tube can increase the success rate of bedside postpyloric placement, decrease the time to successful placement, and decrease the need for supplemental radiographs and IR.