Kumar Divyesh, Srinivasa G Y, Gupta Ankita, Rai Bhavana, Oinam Arun S, Bansal Pooja, Ghoshal Sushmita
Department of Radiotherapy and Oncology, Regional Cancer Centre, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
Department of Biostatistics, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India.
J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2019 Nov 19;31(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s43046-019-0003-2.
Carcinoma cervix is amongst the leading causes of mortality and morbidity in women population worldwide. High-dose-rate intracavitary brachytherapy (HDR-ICBT) post external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is the standard of care in managing locally advanced stage cervical cancer patients. HDR-ICBT is generally performed under general anaesthesia (GA) in operation theatre (OT), but due to logistic reasons, sometimes, it becomes difficult to accommodate all patients under GA. Since prolonged overall treatment time (OTT) makes the results inferior, taking patients in day care setup under procedural sedation (PS) can be an effective alternative. In this audit, we tried to retrospectively analyse the dosimetric difference, if any, in patients who underwent ICBT at our centre, under either GA in OT or PS in day care.
Thirty five patients were analysed 16/35 (45.71%) patients underwent HDR-ICBT under GA while 19/35 (54.28%) patients under PS. In both groups, a statistically significant difference was observed between the dose received by 0.1 cc as well as 2 cc of rectum (p < 0.05), while the bladder and sigmoid colon had comparable dosages.
Though our dosimetric analysis highlighted better rectal sparing in patients undergoing HDR-ICBT under GA when compared to patients under PS, PS can still be considered an effective alternative, especially in centres dealing with significant patient load. Further studies are required for firm conclusion.
宫颈癌是全球女性死亡和发病的主要原因之一。外照射放疗(EBRT)后高剂量率腔内近距离放疗(HDR-ICBT)是局部晚期宫颈癌患者治疗的标准方法。HDR-ICBT通常在手术室(OT)全身麻醉(GA)下进行,但由于后勤原因,有时很难让所有患者都在全身麻醉下接受治疗。由于延长总治疗时间(OTT)会使治疗效果变差,在日间护理机构采用程序镇静(PS)对患者进行治疗可能是一种有效的替代方法。在本次审计中,我们试图回顾性分析在我们中心接受ICBT治疗的患者,无论是在手术室全身麻醉下还是在日间护理机构程序镇静下,剂量学上是否存在差异。
对35例患者进行了分析,16/35(45.71%)例患者在全身麻醉下接受了HDR-ICBT,而19/35(54.28%)例患者在程序镇静下接受治疗。在两组中,直肠0.1 cc和2 cc所接受的剂量之间观察到统计学上的显著差异(p < 0.05),而膀胱和乙状结肠的剂量相当。
尽管我们的剂量学分析表明,与程序镇静下的患者相比,全身麻醉下接受HDR-ICBT的患者直肠受量更低,但程序镇静仍可被视为一种有效的替代方法,特别是在患者数量较多的中心。需要进一步研究才能得出确切结论。