Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

PURPOSE: To compare the uncertainties in CT- and MRI-based seed reconstruction in postimplant evaluation after prostate seed brachytherapy in terms of interobserver variability and quantify the impact of seed detection variability on a selection of dosimetric parameters for three postplan techniques: (1) CT, (2) MRI-T1 weighted fused with MRI-T2 weighted, and (3) CT fused with MRI-T2 weighted. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Seven physicists reconstructed the seed positions on postimplant CT and MRI-T1 images of three patients. For each patient and imaging modality, the interobserver variability was calculated with respect to a reference seed set. The effect of this variability on dosimetry was calculated for CT and CT + MRI-T2 (CT-based seed reconstruction), as well as for MRI-T1 + MRI-T2 (MRI-T1-based seed reconstruction), using fixed CT and MRI-T2 prostate contours. RESULTS: Averaged over three patients, the interobserver variability in CT-based seed reconstruction was 1.1 mm (1 SDref, i.e., standard deviation with respect to the reference value). The D90 (dose delivered to 90% of the target) variability was 1.5% and 1.3% (1 SDref) for CT and CT + MRI-T2, respectively. The mean interobserver variability in MRI-based seed reconstruction was 3.0 mm (1 SDref), and the impact of this variability on D90 was 6.6% for MRI-T1 + MRI-T2. CONCLUSIONS: Seed reconstruction on MRI-T1-weighted images was less accurate than on CT. This difference in uncertainties should be weighted against uncertainties due to contouring and image fusion when comparing the overall reliability of postplan techniques.

Original publication




Journal article



Publication Date





580 - 588


Postplanning, Prostate, Seed reconstruction, Brachytherapy, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Observer Variation, Prostate, Prostatic Neoplasms, Radiometry, Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted, Reproducibility of Results, Tomography, X-Ray Computed