Therapeutic prostate cancer interventions

a systematic review on pubic arch interference and needle positioning errors

Review (2024)
Author(s)

J. Bloemberg (TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology)

Martijn de Vries (TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology)

Luigi Van Riel (Universiteit van Amsterdam)

Theo M. de Reijke (Universiteit van Amsterdam)

Aimée Sakes (TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology)

P. Breedveld (TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology)

J. van den Dobbelsteen (TU Delft - Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology)

Research Group
Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology
DOI related publication
https://doi.org/10.1080/17434440.2024.2374761
More Info
expand_more
Publication Year
2024
Language
English
Research Group
Medical Instruments & Bio-Inspired Technology
Issue number
7
Volume number
21
Pages (from-to)
625-641
Reuse Rights

Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.

Abstract

Introduction: This study focuses on the quantification of and current guidelines on the hazards related to needle positioning in prostate cancer treatment: (1) access restrictions to the prostate gland by the pubic arch, so-called Pubic Arch Interference (PAI) and (2) needle positioning errors. Next, we propose solution strategies to mitigate these hazards. Methods: The literature search was executed in the Embase, Medline ALL, Web of Science Core Collection*, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Results: The literature search resulted in 50 included articles. PAI was reported in patients with various prostate volumes. The level of reported PAI varied between 0 and 22.3 mm, depending on the patient’s position and the measuring method. Low-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy induced the largest reported misplacement errors, especially in the cranio-caudal direction (up to 10 mm) and the largest displacement errors were reported for High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy in the cranio-caudal direction (up to 47 mm), generally increasing over time. Conclusions: Current clinical guidelines related to prostate volume, needle positioning accuracy, and maximum allowable PAI are ambiguous, and compliance in the clinical setting differs between institutions. Solutions, such as steerable needles, assist in mitigating the hazards and potentially allow the physician to proceed with the procedure. This systematic review was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The review was registered at Protocols.io (DOI: dx.doi.org/10.17504/protocols.io.6qpvr89eplmk/v1).