Evaluation of three different CT simulation and planning procedures for the preoperative irradiation of operable rectal cancer

PurposeTo find the best procedure regarding quality and work load for treatment planning in operable non-locally advanced rectal cancer using 3D CT-based information.MethodsThe study population consisted of 62 patients with non-locally advanced tumours, as defined by MRI in the lower (N = 16), middle (N = 25) and upper (N = 21) rectum referred for preoperative short-course radiotherapy. In procedure 1 (Pr1), planning in one central plane was performed (field borders/shielding based on bony anatomy). In procedure 2 (Pr2), field borders were determined by 2 markers for the extension of the CTV in the cranial and ventral direction. Dose optimization was performed in one central and two border planes. In procedure 3(Pr3) the PTV volume (CTV was contoured on CT) received conformal treatment (3D dose optimization).ResultsConformity index reached 1.6 for Pr3 vs. 2.2 for Pr2 (p < 0.001). PTV coverage was 87%, 94%, 99% in Pr1, Pr2, Pr3, respectively (p = 0.001). In Pr2 target coverage was below 95% for low/middle tumours. PTV coverage was reduced by narrow field borders (18–23%) and shielding (28%). A total of 43.5% (1–100) of the bladder volume was treated in Pr2 in contrast to 16% (0–68) in Pr3 (p < 0.001). The maximum dose was exceeded in 10 patients (26–298 cc) and 2 patients (21–36 cc) in procedures 1 and 2, respectively. The overall time spent by technologists was 86 min for Pr3 vs 17 min in Pr2 and Pr1 (p < 0.001), for radiation oncologists this difference was 24 vs 4 min (p < 0.001).ConclusionsPr1 does not fulfill todays quality requirements. Pr3 provides the best quality at the cost of working time. Pr2 is less time consuming, however, the PTV coverage was insufficient, with also much larger treatment volumes. An optimization of the PTV coverage in Pr2 even further enlarged the treatment volume.