Related Experiment Video
Updated: Nov 29, 2025

Proton Therapy Delivery and Its Clinical Application in Select Solid Tumor Malignancies
Published on: February 6, 2019
Radiation dose reduction during intra-arterial chemotherapy for retinoblastoma: a retrospective analysis of 96
Eric J Monroe1,2, Jeffrey Forris Beecham Chick3,4, Andrew W Stacey5
1Section of Interventional Radiology, Department of Radiology, Seattle Children's Hospital, 4800 Sand Point Way NE, M/S R-5417, Seattle, WA, 98105, USA. eric.monroe@seattlechildrens.org.
Background:
Intra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC) represents a mainstay of retinoblastoma treatment in children. Patients with retinoblastoma are uniquely at risk for secondary malignancies and are sensitive to the ionizing effects of radiation.
Objective:
To retrospectively review a single institution's experience with IAC for retinoblastoma and the effect of variable intra-procedural imaging techniques on radiation exposure.
Materials And Methods:
Twenty-four consecutive patients, with a mean age of 30.8±16.3 months (range: 3.2-83.4 months), undergoing IAC for retinoblastoma between May 2014 and May 2020 (72 months) were included. No patients were excluded. The primary outcome was radiation exposure and secondary outcomes included technical success and procedural adverse events. Technical success was defined as catheterization of the ophthalmic or meningolacrimal artery and complete delivery of chemotherapy. Each procedure was retrospectively reviewed and categorized as one of five imaging protocol types. Protocol types were characterized by uniplanar versus multiplanar imaging and digital subtraction angiographic versus roadmap angiographic techniques. Radiation exposure, protocol utilization, the association of protocol and radiation exposure were assessed.
Results:
During 96 consecutive interventions, 109 ocular treatments were performed. Thirteen of the 96 (15.5%) treatments were bilateral. Ocular technical success was 106 of 109 (97.2%). All three treatment failures were successfully repeated within a week. Mean fluoroscopy time was 6.4±6.2 min (range: 0.7-31.1 min). Mean air kerma was 36.2±52.2 mGy (range: 1.4-215.0 mGy). There were two major (1.8%) complications and four (3.7%) minor complications. Of the 96 procedures, 10 (10.4%), 9 (9.4%), 13 (13.5%), 28 (29.2%) and 36 (37.5%) were performed using protocol types A, B, C, D and E, respectively. For protocol type A, mean fluoroscopy time was 10.3±6.8 min (range: 3.0-25.4 min) and mean air kerma was 118.2±61.2 mGy (range: 24.5-167.3 mGy). For protocol type E, mean fluoroscopy time was 3.1±3.2 min (range: 0.7-15.1 min) and mean air kerma was 5.4±4.2 mGy (range: 1.4-19.5 mGy). Fluoroscopy time and air kerma decreased over time, corresponding to the reduced use of multiplanar imaging and digital subtraction angiography. In the first quartile (procedures 1-24), 8 (33.3%), 7 (29.2%), 2 (8.3%), 6 (25.0%) and 1 (4.2%) were performed using protocol types A, B, C, D and E, respectively. Mean fluoroscopy time was 10.5±8.2 min (range: 2.4-28.1 min) and mean air kerma was 84.2±71.6 mGy (range: 12.8-215.0 mGy). In the final quartile (procedures 73-96), 24 (100%) procedures were performed using protocol type E. Mean fluoroscopy time was 3.5±4.0 min (range: 0.7-15.1 min) and mean air kerma was 5.0±4.3 mGy (range: 1.4-18.0 mGy), representing 66.7% and 94.1% reductions from the first quartile, respectively. Technical success in the second half of the experience was 100%.
Conclusion:
Sequence elimination, consolidation from biplane imaging to lateral-only imaging, and replacing digital subtraction with roadmap angiography dramatically reduced radiation exposure during IAC for retinoblastoma without adversely affecting technical success or safety.
More Related Videos
07:57Positron Emission Tomography-based Dose Painting Radiation Therapy in a Glioblastoma Rat Model using the Small Animal Radiation Research Platform
Published on: March 24, 2022
06:20Irradiator Commissioning and Dosimetry for Assessment of LQ α and β Parameters, Radiation Dosing Schema, and in vivo Dose Deposition
Published on: March 11, 2021