Room: ePoster Forums
Purpose: A volume study for prostate implant plays an important role as it gives us the initial plan how to implant the seeds. However, ultrasound based volume study is time consuming and some patients cannot tolerance it. A MRI based volume study will give us a fast and easy way to overcome these problems we mentioned.
Methods: A MIM symphony 6.8.4 commission was finished before this patient study. A prostate phantom with MRI/US compatible was used for end-end study. Three patients underwent an ultrasound volume study, took CT and MRI as the same day for this study. The ultrasound, MRI volume contour and planning was done in MIM Symphony. All of the contours and plan finally checked and approved by attending physician. The cross comparison between US and MRI are listed.
Results: The average prostate volume of these patients is 38.2Â±2.1cc, 37.4Â±1.8cc and 43.8Â±4.1 cc for MRI, US and CT respectively. The volume difference between MRI and US is â‰¤ 5%; however, the volume of CT is over 15%. The seed number and needle loading are similar in both MRI based and US based plan. The seed loading position from MRI is shifted due to lack of prostate probe.The plan quality of MRI and US based are similar. Due to anatomy change between the scans, the rectum and bladder dose can not compared between MRI and US plans. A further workflow in OR with MRI based volume plan will carry on based on our current study.
Conclusion: A MRI based alternate volume study can give same dose and implant information as US based volume study, a faster way to save time and more conformable for patients.A further investigation with more patients and model based MRI plan strategy will carry on in next step.