Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 26, 2026

Voluntary Breath-hold Technique for Reducing Heart Dose in Left Breast Radiotherapy
Published on: July 3, 2014
Comparing a volume based template approach and ultrasound guided freehand approach in multicatheter interstitial
Vicky Y Koh1, Shaik A Buhari2, Poh Wee Tan1
1Department of Radiation Oncology, National University Cancer Institute Singapore, Singapore.
Purpose:
Currently, there are two described methods of catheter insertion for women undergoing multicatheter interstitial accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI). These are a volume based template approach (template) and a non-template ultrasound guidance freehand approach (non-template). We aim to compare dosimetric endpoints between the template and non-template approach.
Material And Methods:
Twenty patients, who received adjuvant multicatheter interstitial APBI between August 2008 to March 2010 formed the study cohort. Dosimetric planning was based on the RTOG 04-13 protocol. For standardization, the planning target volume evaluation (PTV-Eval) and organs at risk were contoured with the assistance of the attending surgeon. Dosimetric endpoints include D90 of the PTV-Eval, Dose Homogeneity Index (DHI), V200, maximum skin dose (MSD), and maximum chest wall dose (MCD). A median of 18 catheters was used per patient. The dose prescribed was 34 Gy in 10 fractions BID over 5 days.
Results:
The average breast volume was 846 cm(3) (526-1384) for the entire cohort and there was no difference between the two groups (p = 0.6). Insertion time was significantly longer for the non-template approach (mean 150 minutes) compared to the template approach (mean: 90 minutes) (p = 0.02). The planning time was also significantly longer for the non-template approach (mean: 240 minutes) compared to the template approach (mean: 150 minutes) (p < 0.01). The template approach yielded a higher D90 (mean: 95%) compared to the non-template approach (mean: 92%) (p < 0.01). There were no differences in DHI (p = 0.14), V200 (p = 0.21), MSD (p = 0.7), and MCD (p = 0.8).
Conclusions:
Compared to the non-template approach, the template approach offered significant shorter insertion and planning times with significantly improved dosimetric PTV-Eval coverage without significantly compromising organs at risk dosimetrically.
More Related Videos
13:48Reduction of Radiation Exposure during Endovascular Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Disease Combining Fiber Optic RealShape Technology and Intravascular Ultrasound
Published on: April 21, 2023
08:34Proton Therapy Delivery and Its Clinical Application in Select Solid Tumor Malignancies
Published on: February 6, 2019