Dosimetric Comparison of Tandem and Ovoids vs. Tandem and Ring for Intracavitary Gynecologic Applications

Abstract 

We evaluated dosimetric differences in tandem and ovoid (TO) and tandem and ring (TR) gynecologic brachytherapy applicators. Seventeen patients with cervical cancer (Stages II-IV) receiving 3 high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy applications (both TO and TR) were studied. Patients underwent computed tomography (CT) scans with contrast in bladder, and were prescribed 8 Gy to ICRU points A, with additional optimization goals of maintaining the pear-shaped dose distribution and minimizing bladder and rectum doses. Bladder and rectum point doses, mean, and maximum doses were calculated. Total treatment time and volumes treated to 95%, 85%, 50%, and 20% or the prescription dose were compared. There were no significant differences between TO and TR applicators in doses to prescription points or critical organs. However, there were significant differences (p < 0.001) between the applicators in treated volumes and total treatment time. The TO treated larger volumes over a longer time. Within each patient, when the applicators were compared, treated volumes were also found to be significantly different (p < 0.01, χ²). Our results demonstrate that the 2 applicators, while delivering the prescribed dose to points A and keeping critical organ doses below tolerance, treat significantly different volumes. It is unclear if this difference is clinically meaningful. TO applicators may be treating surrounding healthy tissue unnecessarily, or TR applicators may be underdosing tumor tissue. Further investigation with appropriate imaging modalities is required for accurate delineation of target volumes. Clearly, the TO and TR are not identical, and should not be used interchangeably without further study.

Key Words: Brachytherapy, Tandem and ring, Tandem and ovoids, High-dose rate (HDR), Cervical cancer