کد مقاله کد نشریه سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی نسخه تمام متن
6098212 1210332 2012 10 صفحه PDF دانلود رایگان
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله ISI
Original articleClinical endoscopyComparative analysis of traditional and coiled fiducials implanted during EUS for pancreatic cancer patients receiving stereotactic body radiation therapy
موضوعات مرتبط
علوم پزشکی و سلامت پزشکی و دندانپزشکی بیماری‌های گوارشی
پیش نمایش صفحه اول مقاله
Original articleClinical endoscopyComparative analysis of traditional and coiled fiducials implanted during EUS for pancreatic cancer patients receiving stereotactic body radiation therapy
چکیده انگلیسی

BackgroundEUS-guided fiducial placement facilitates image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT).ObjectiveTo compare 2 types of commercially available fiducials for technical success, complications, visibility, and migration.DesignRetrospective, single-center, comparative study.SettingTertiary-care medical center.InterventionsTraditional fiducials (TFs) (5-mm length, 0.8-mm diameter) and Visicoil fiducials (VFs) (10-mm length, 0.35-mm diameter) were compared. Fiducials were placed using linear 19-gauge (for TFs) or 22-gauge (for VFs) needles. A subjective visualization scoring system (0-2; 0 = not visible, 1 = barely visible, 2 = clearly visible) was used to assess visibility on CT. Fiducial migration was calculated as a change in interfiducial distance.Main Outcome MeasurementsTechnical success, complications, visibility, and migration of 2 types of fiducials.ResultsThirty-nine patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer underwent EUS-guided placement of 103 fiducials (77 TFs, 26 VFs). The mean number of fiducials placed per patient was 2.66 (standard deviation 0.67) for the 19-gauge needle and 2.60 (standard deviation 0.70) for the 22-gauge needle (P = .83). No intra- or postprocedural complications were encountered. The median visibility score for TFs was significantly better than that for VFs, both when scores of 0 were and were not included (2.00, interquartile range [IQR] 2.00-2.00 vs 1.75, IQR 1.50-2.00, P = .009 and 2.00, IQR 2.00-2.00 vs 2.00, IQR 1.50-2.00, P < .0001, respectively). The mean migration was not significantly different between the 2 types of fiducials (0.8 mm [IQR 0.4-1.6 mm] for TFs vs 1.3 mm [IQR 0.6-1.5 mm] for VFs; P = .72).LimitationsRetrospective, nonrandomized design.ConclusionsVisibility was significantly better for TFs compared with VFs. The degree of fiducial migration was not significantly different for TFs and VFs. There was no significant difference in the mean number of fiducials placed, indicating a similar degree of technical difficulty for TF and VF deployment.

ناشر
Database: Elsevier - ScienceDirect (ساینس دایرکت)
Journal: Gastrointestinal Endoscopy - Volume 76, Issue 5, November 2012, Pages 962-971
نویسندگان
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,