Rectal function following prostate brachytherapy

PURPOSE: Quality of life following therapeutic intervention for carcinoma of the prostate gland has not been well documented. In particular, a paucity of data has been published regarding bowel function following prostate brachytherapy. This study evaluated late bowel function in 209 consecutive prostate brachytherapy patients via a one-time questionnaire administered 16-55 months postimplant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two hundred nineteen consecutive patients underwent permanent prostate brachytherapy from April 1995 through February 1998 using either (125)I or (103)Pd for clinical T1c-T3a carcinoma of the prostate gland. Of the 219 patients, 7 had expired. Of the remaining 212 patients (median follow-up, 28 months), each patient was mailed a self-administered questionnaire (10 questions) with a prestamped return envelope; 209 (98.6%) surveys were returned. Clinical parameters evaluated for bowel dysfunction included patient age, diabetes, hypertension, history of tobacco consumption, clinical T-stage, elapsed time since implant, and prostate ultrasound volume. Treatment parameters included utilization of neoadjuvant hormonal manipulation, utilization of moderate dose external beam radiation therapy prior to implantation, choice of isotope ((125)I vs. (103)Pd), rectal dose (average, median and maximum doses), total implanted seed strength, values of the minimum dose received by 90% of the prostate gland (D(90)), and the percent prostate volume receiving 100%, 150%, and 200% of the prescribed minimum peripheral dose (V(100), V(150) and V(200), respectively). Because detailed baseline bowel function was not available for these patients, a cross-sectional survey was performed in which 30 newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients of comparable demographics served as controls. RESULTS: The total rectal function scores for the brachytherapy and control patients were 4.3 and 1.6, respectively, out of a total 27 points (p < 0.001). Of the evaluated clinical parameters, only the preimplant number of bowel movements per day were correlated with the total survey score (p < 0.01). None of the treatment parameters were significantly correlated with the total survey score. Despite the fact that implantation with (103)Pd resulted in lower radiation doses to the rectum, the choice of isotope was not predictive of bowel function scores. A trend toward increased rectal scores was noted for older patients, and a nonsignificant improvement in rectal survey scores was noted with elapsed time from implantation. Only 19.2% (40/208) of the treatment group reported a worsening of bowel function following implantation. Patient perception of overall rectal quality of life, however, was inversely related to the utilization of external beam radiation therapy (p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: To date, no severe changes in late bowel function have been noted following prostate brachytherapy. Although the survey scores indicate bowel function is worse after an implant, the minor changes are not significant enough to bother most individuals. Less than 20% of patients reported that their bowel function was worse following prostate brachytherapy.