室内mri引导下腔内/间质联合近距离治疗宫颈癌术中疗效分析。

IF 1.8 4区医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY

Brachytherapy Pub Date : 2025-07-31 DOI:10.1016/j.brachy.2025.07.001

Kitty Chan , Heather Ballantyne , Zhihui Amy Liu , Michael Milosevic , Jennifer Croke , Anthony Fyles , Jelena Lukovic , Alexandra Rink , Akbar Beiki-Ardakani , Jette Borg , Monica Serban , Robert A. Weersink , Jessica L. Conway , Sarah Rauth , Julia Skliarenko , Jason Xie , Anna Simeonov , Kathy Han

{"title":"室内mri引导下腔内/间质联合近距离治疗宫颈癌术中疗效分析。","authors":"Kitty Chan , Heather Ballantyne , Zhihui Amy Liu , Michael Milosevic , Jennifer Croke , Anthony Fyles , Jelena Lukovic , Alexandra Rink , Akbar Beiki-Ardakani , Jette Borg , Monica Serban , Robert A. Weersink , Jessica L. Conway , Sarah Rauth , Julia Skliarenko , Jason Xie , Anna Simeonov , Kathy Han","doi":"10.1016/j.brachy.2025.07.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>PURPOSE</h3><div>Magnetic resonance image-guided brachytherapy (MRgBT) is the gold-standard treatment for cervical cancer. This study examined workflow times in an integrated MRgBT suite and conventional operating room (OR), and factors contributing to intraoperative efficiency.</div></div><div><h3>METHODS AND MATERIALS</h3><div>Consecutive patients with FIGO stage IB-IVA cervical cancer who underwent MRgBT procedures between 2019-2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Workflow times were collected: applicator insertion, MR-imaging, contouring, treatment planning, treatment execution and total procedure time. Procedure durations between applicators and over time were compared.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS</h3><div>The 161 patients included in this study underwent 267 procedures in the MRgBT suite, and 56 procedures in the OR using ovoid and tandem applicator (O&T, 46%), ring and tandem (R&T, 28%), or Syed-Neblett template (Template, 27%). The median duration (minutes) of each step was: general anesthesia induction (<span><span>18</span></span>), applicator insertion (31), MR-imaging (28), parallel contouring (48) and applicator/needle registration & treatment plan optimization (83), and treatment execution (19). Total procedure time was much longer in the OR (488 minutes) than MRgBT suite (205 minutes). Template cases were significantly longer in insertion, MR-imaging, contouring, planning and total procedure time (by 52 minutes) compared with those using the R&T/O&T applicators (p<0.001). Total procedure time for Template cases reduced by 10 minutes/year since 2019 (p<0.001). Regardless of applicator type, total procedure time for subsequent insertions was 21 minutes less than the first (p<0.001).</div></div><div><h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3><div>MRgBT procedure time was longer for Syed-Neblett template cases, but shorter in subsequent insertions. The overall procedure time was much shorter in the integrated MRgBT suite than conventional OR.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55334,"journal":{"name":"Brachytherapy","volume":"24 5","pages":"Pages 729-737"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Intra-operative process efficiency for in-room MRI-guided combined intracavitary/interstitial brachytherapy for cervical cancer\",\"authors\":\"Kitty Chan , Heather Ballantyne , Zhihui Amy Liu , Michael Milosevic , Jennifer Croke , Anthony Fyles , Jelena Lukovic , Alexandra Rink , Akbar Beiki-Ardakani , Jette Borg , Monica Serban , Robert A. Weersink , Jessica L. Conway , Sarah Rauth , Julia Skliarenko , Jason Xie , Anna Simeonov , Kathy Han\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.brachy.2025.07.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>PURPOSE</h3><div>Magnetic resonance image-guided brachytherapy (MRgBT) is the gold-standard treatment for cervical cancer. This study examined workflow times in an integrated MRgBT suite and conventional operating room (OR), and factors contributing to intraoperative efficiency.</div></div><div><h3>METHODS AND MATERIALS</h3><div>Consecutive patients with FIGO stage IB-IVA cervical cancer who underwent MRgBT procedures between 2019-2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Workflow times were collected: applicator insertion, MR-imaging, contouring, treatment planning, treatment execution and total procedure time. Procedure durations between applicators and over time were compared.</div></div><div><h3>RESULTS</h3><div>The 161 patients included in this study underwent 267 procedures in the MRgBT suite, and 56 procedures in the OR using ovoid and tandem applicator (O&T, 46%), ring and tandem (R&T, 28%), or Syed-Neblett template (Template, 27%). The median duration (minutes) of each step was: general anesthesia induction (<span><span>18</span></span>), applicator insertion (31), MR-imaging (28), parallel contouring (48) and applicator/needle registration & treatment plan optimization (83), and treatment execution (19). Total procedure time was much longer in the OR (488 minutes) than MRgBT suite (205 minutes). Template cases were significantly longer in insertion, MR-imaging, contouring, planning and total procedure time (by 52 minutes) compared with those using the R&T/O&T applicators (p<0.001). Total procedure time for Template cases reduced by 10 minutes/year since 2019 (p<0.001). Regardless of applicator type, total procedure time for subsequent insertions was 21 minutes less than the first (p<0.001).</div></div><div><h3>CONCLUSIONS</h3><div>MRgBT procedure time was longer for Syed-Neblett template cases, but shorter in subsequent insertions. The overall procedure time was much shorter in the integrated MRgBT suite than conventional OR.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55334,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brachytherapy\",\"volume\":\"24 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 729-737\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brachytherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1538472125001242\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brachytherapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1538472125001242","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

目的：磁共振成像引导近距离放射治疗（MRgBT）是宫颈癌治疗的金标准。本研究考察了综合MRgBT套件和传统手术室（OR）的工作流程时间，以及影响术中效率的因素。方法和材料：回顾性分析2019-2022年期间连续接受MRgBT手术的FIGO期IB-IVA宫颈癌患者。收集工作流程时间：涂抹器插入、磁共振成像、轮廓、治疗计划、治疗执行和总手术时间。比较了涂抹器和随时间的过程持续时间。结果：本研究纳入的161例患者在MRgBT套件中进行了267次手术，在手术室中使用卵圆和串联涂抹器（O&T, 46%），环和串联涂抹器（R&T, 28%）或Syed-Neblett模板（template, 27%）进行了56次手术。每个步骤的中位持续时间（分钟）为：全麻诱导（18）、涂抹器插入（31）、磁共振成像（28）、平行轮廓（48）、涂抹器/针头注册和治疗计划优化（83）、治疗执行（19）。总的手术时间（488分钟）比MRgBT套件（205分钟）要长得多。与使用R&T/O&T涂布器的患者相比，模板病例在插入、核磁共振成像、轮廓、计划和总手术时间（52分钟）方面明显更长（结论：Syed-Neblett模板病例的MRgBT手术时间更长，但随后的插入时间更短）。综合MRgBT套件的整体手术时间比传统手术室短得多。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Intra-operative process efficiency for in-room MRI-guided combined intracavitary/interstitial brachytherapy for cervical cancer

PURPOSE

Magnetic resonance image-guided brachytherapy (MRgBT) is the gold-standard treatment for cervical cancer. This study examined workflow times in an integrated MRgBT suite and conventional operating room (OR), and factors contributing to intraoperative efficiency.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Consecutive patients with FIGO stage IB-IVA cervical cancer who underwent MRgBT procedures between 2019-2022 were retrospectively reviewed. Workflow times were collected: applicator insertion, MR-imaging, contouring, treatment planning, treatment execution and total procedure time. Procedure durations between applicators and over time were compared.

RESULTS

The 161 patients included in this study underwent 267 procedures in the MRgBT suite, and 56 procedures in the OR using ovoid and tandem applicator (O&T, 46%), ring and tandem (R&T, 28%), or Syed-Neblett template (Template, 27%). The median duration (minutes) of each step was: general anesthesia induction (18), applicator insertion (31), MR-imaging (28), parallel contouring (48) and applicator/needle registration & treatment plan optimization (83), and treatment execution (19). Total procedure time was much longer in the OR (488 minutes) than MRgBT suite (205 minutes). Template cases were significantly longer in insertion, MR-imaging, contouring, planning and total procedure time (by 52 minutes) compared with those using the R&T/O&T applicators (p<0.001). Total procedure time for Template cases reduced by 10 minutes/year since 2019 (p<0.001). Regardless of applicator type, total procedure time for subsequent insertions was 21 minutes less than the first (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

MRgBT procedure time was longer for Syed-Neblett template cases, but shorter in subsequent insertions. The overall procedure time was much shorter in the integrated MRgBT suite than conventional OR.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Brachytherapy 医学-核医学

CiteScore

3.40

自引率

21.10%

发文量

119

审稿时长

9.1 weeks

期刊介绍： Brachytherapy is an international and multidisciplinary journal that publishes original peer-reviewed articles and selected reviews on the techniques and clinical applications of interstitial and intracavitary radiation in the management of cancers. Laboratory and experimental research relevant to clinical practice is also included. Related disciplines include medical physics, medical oncology, and radiation oncology and radiology. Brachytherapy publishes technical advances, original articles, reviews, and point/counterpoint on controversial issues. Original articles that address any aspect of brachytherapy are invited. Letters to the Editor-in-Chief are encouraged.