Purpose To compare the differences in dosimetry and toxicities between Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Computed Tomography (CT)-guided intracavitary and interstitial implantation for locally advanced cervical cancer, respectively. Methods We analyzed 40 cases of locally advanced cervical cancer admitted to our hospital from January 2023 to September 2024. Patients underwent CT-guided intracavitary and interstitial implantation followed by MRI scanning. We compared the volume of HR-CTV and IR-CTV, the dosimetric differences of HR-CTV D 90 and IR-CTV D 90 , and the dosimetric differences of D 2cc for the bladder, rectum, and small intestine under the two localization methods. Results The mean HR-CTV and IR-CTV volumes were larger using CT guidance compared with MRI guidance (P0.05), the differences were statistically significant. The HR-CTV D 90 and IR-CTV D 90 were smaller using CT than MRI guidance. The difference was statistically significant (P0.05). There was a statistically significant difference in the rectum D 2cc between CT and MRI guidance (P0.05), while there was no statistically significant difference for the D 2cc of the bladder and small intestine between the two methods (P0.05). Conclusion Intracavitary and interstitial implantation under MRI guidance can significantly improve HR-CTV and IR-CTV D 90 with reduced target volume and good protection of the rectum, and there is no significant difference for the bladder and small intestine.
Yang et al. (Wed,) studied this question.