Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Three-port perineal sparing technique.

S A Spencer1, P N Pareek, I Brezovich

  • 1Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Alabama in Birmingham 35223.

Radiology
|August 1, 1991
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

SU-E-T-433: Pear-Shaped Based Dose Optimization for HDR Intracavitary Brachytherapy for Cervical Cancer Patients with Small Uterus.

Medical physics·2017
Same author

SU-E-T-631: Beam Geometry Selection Using Sequential Beam Addition.

Medical physics·2017
Same author

MO-D-BRB-06: JUNIOR INVESTIGATOR WINNER - Fast and Accurate Patient Specific Collision Detection for Radiation Therapy.

Medical physics·2017
Same author

SU-E-T-538: Evaluation of IMRT Dose Calculation Based on Pencil-Beam and AAA Algorithms.

Medical physics·2017
Same author

TU-E-BRB-11: End-To-End Positioning Quality Assurance for Image-Guided Radiosurgery of Multiple Targets Using a Single-Isocenter.

Medical physics·2017
Same author

SU-E-J-141: Assessment of the Magnitude and Impact of Trigger Delay in Respiratory Triggered Real-Time Imaging during Radiotherapy.

Medical physics·2017
Same journal

Erratum for: Prediction of Lobar Emphysema Progression with a CT-Based Foundational Model.

Radiology·2026
Same journal

Erratum for: Associations of MRI-derived Paraspinal IMAT and LMM with Cardiometabolic Risk Factors: Results from a German Cohort.

Radiology·2026
Same journal

Erratum for: Blue Rubber Bleb Nevus Syndrome.

Radiology·2026
Same journal

Redefining the Clinical Role of MRI in Endometrial Cancer Staging.

Radiology·2026
Same journal

To Ablate or Not to Ablate: The Colorectal Liver Metastasis Question.

Radiology·2026
Same journal

The Limits of Radiologic Categorization in Pulmonary Nonsolid Nodules.

Radiology·2026
See all related articles

This study introduces a skin-sparing radiation technique for pelvic cancers, significantly reducing skin dose and irritation. The method ensures adequate pelvic and perineal dose delivery without compromising local control.

Area of Science:

  • Oncology
  • Radiation Oncology
  • Medical Physics

Background:

  • Low-lying pelvic malignancies require precise radiation delivery to the pelvis and perineum.
  • Traditional radiation techniques can lead to significant skin dose and toxicity, particularly in the perineal region.
  • Skin-sparing techniques aim to reduce radiation dose to the skin while maintaining target coverage.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate a novel skin-sparing radiation technique for low-lying pelvic malignancies.
  • To assess the impact of this technique on skin dose, acute perineal skin toxicity, and local tumor control.
  • To compare the outcomes with conventional radiation methods.

Main Methods:

  • Review of records for 103 patients with low-lying pelvic malignancies treated with a skin-sparing technique.

Related Experiment Videos

  • The technique involved anteroposterior-posteroanterior opposed ports and a direct perineal port with a lead compensator.
  • Acute perineal skin irritation was graded from 0 to 3.

    • Main Results:

    • The skin-sparing technique significantly reduced skin dose compared to simple opposing or four-port techniques.
    • All patients experienced minimal acute perineal skin irritation (grade 0 or 1).
    • No increase in perineal recurrences was observed in patients treated for low-lying rectal carcinoma compared to historical controls.

    Conclusions:

    • The described skin-sparing radiation technique effectively delivers adequate doses to the pelvis and perineum.
    • This approach leads to a significant decrease in local toxic effects, specifically perineal skin irritation.
    • The technique maintains local tumor control, making it a viable option for treating low-lying pelvic malignancies.