Coverage of the external prostatic region by the hybrid method compared with the conventional method of prostate low-dose-rate brachytherapy: A randomized controlled study.

Nobumichi Tanaka, Isao Asakawa, Yasushi Nakai, Makito Miyake, Satoshi Anai, Kaori Yamaki, Tomomi Fujii, Masatoshi Hasegawa, Kiyohide Fujimoto

Journal: International journal of urology : official journal of the Japanese Urological Association 2021;27(11):1013-1017

PMID: 32783280

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To compare the dose evaluation parameters between conventional (using loose seed alone) and hybrid (using loose seeds in combination with stranded seeds) low-dose rate brachytherapy for prostate cancer.

METHODS

Between 2014 and July 2016, a total of 219 patients who underwent low-dose rate brachytherapy were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial (trial number: UMIN 000012780). Patients were randomized and allocated to two groups (conventional method vs hybrid method). Post-dosimetric parameters (%D90, minimal percentage of the dose received by 90% of the prostate gland; V100, percentage of the prostate volume receiving 100% of the prescribed minimal peripheral dose; V150, percentage of the prostate volume receiving 150% of the prescribed minimal peripheral dose; %UD30, minimal percentage of the dose received by 30% of the urethra; R100, rectal volume [mL] receiving 100% of the prescribed dose) calculated at 1 month after seed implantation by computed tomography scan were compared between the two groups, as well as the post-dosimetric parameters using the planning target volume of the prostate + 5-mm margin.

RESULTS

Regarding dose evaluation parameters, the prostate dose (%D90, V100, V150) and the urethral dose (%UD30) were not significantly different between the two groups, whereas V100 (+5-mm margin) and %D90 (+5-mm margin) were significantly higher in the hybrid method group compared with the conventional method group (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The present randomized study shows that the hybrid method of low-dose rate brachytherapy can achieve a higher coverage of the periprostatic region compared with the conventional method while maintaining an acceptable level of urethral and rectal doses.

© 2020 The Japanese Urological Association.

Address: Department of, Departments of, Urology, Nara Medical University, Kashihara, Nara, Japan.; Department of, Radiation Oncology, Nara Medical University, Kashihara, Nara, Japan.; Department of, Diagnostic Pathology, Nara Medical University, Kashihara, Nara, Japan.
Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.