Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 17  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 383-388

Rectal wall sparing effect of a rectal retractor in prostate intensity-modulated radiotherapy


1 Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences; Department of Medical Physics, Roshana Cancer Institute, Tehran, Iran
3 Department of Radiology, Faculty of Para-Medicine, Hormozgan University of Medical Sciences, Bandar-Abbas, Iran
4 Department of Radiation Oncology, Shohada-e-Tajrish Medical Center, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
5 Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences; Radiation Biology Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Hamed Ghaffari
Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran
Iran
Seied Rabi Mahdavi
Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jcrt.JCRT_701_19

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: The objective of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a rectal retractor (RR) designed to protect rectal tissue in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) by pushing rectal wall (RW) away from the prostate. Materials and Methods: Twelve patients with localized prostate cancer were enrolled into this study. Patients underwent two computed tomography (CT) scans without and with RR. A prescription of 80 Gy in 40 fractions was planned on CT scans with and without RR. This study evaluates the ability of the RR in RW dose reduction, in particular reduction of the RW V70Gy 25% in comparison with the plan without RR dose-volume histograms were generated with and without RR. The patient's tolerance was assessed by patient-reported outcomes. Results: The planning target volume coverage was equal for both without and with RR (P = 0.155). The mean dose to the RW was statistically significantly lower for the plan with RR than that for the plan without RR, a mean reduction of 5.8 Gy (P = 0.003). Significant relative reductions in rectal dose-volume parameters whether in absolute volume (cc) or as a percentage of contoured RW were detected. A relative reduction more than 25% in RW V70Gy(%) in 100% of patients was achieved. The rectal retraction resulted in a significant increase in the prostate to the rectum space at the prostate midgland level, an absolute increase of 2.7 mm. The retraction of the rectum induced a mean (±standard deviation) pain score of 2.7 (±1.3) according to the visual analog score. Conclusion: The application of a RR showed a remarkable rectal sparing effect during prostate IMRT. This may lead to reduced acute and late rectal toxicities in prostate IMRT.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1931    
    Printed19    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded40    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal