scholarly journals Intraoperative marking of the tumour resection surface for improved radiation therapy planning in head and neck cancer: preclinical evaluation of a novel liquid fiducial marker

2020 ◽  
pp. 20200290
Author(s):  
David Steybe ◽  
Maximilian Frederik Russe ◽  
Ute Ludwig ◽  
Tanja Sprave ◽  
Kirstin Vach ◽  
...  

Objective To evaluate a novel liquid fiducial marker for intraoperative marking of the tumour resection surface in oral cancer patients to facilitate precise postoperative delineation of the interface between the tumour resection border and reconstructed tissue for intensity-modulated radiation therapy. Methods A total of 200 markers were created by injecting the volumes of 10 µl, 20 µl, 30 µl, 40 µl and 50 µl of a liquid marker composed of sucrose acetoisobutyrate (SAIB) and iodinated sucrose acetoisobutyrate (x-SAIB) into the soft tissue of porcine mandible segments. Visibility of the resulting markers was quantified by threshold-based segmentation of the marker volume in CT- and CBCT imaging and by a comparison of signal intensities in MRI. Results Even the lowest volume of SAIB-/x-SAIB investigated (10 µl) resulted in a higher visibility (CTSoft tissue: 88.18 ± 13.23 µl; CTBone: 49.55 ± 7.62 µl; CBCT: 54.65 ± 12.58 µl) than observed with the incorporation of titanium ligature clips (CTSoft tissue: 50.15 ± 7.50 mm3; CTBone: 23.90 ± 3.39 mm3; CBCT: 33.80 ± 9.20 mm3). Markers created by the injection of 10 µl and 20 µl could reliably be delineated from markers created by the injection of higher volumes. Conclusion SAIB/x-SAIB, which has recently become available as a Conformité Européenne (CE)-marked fiducial marker, provides an option for fast and reliable production of markers with excellent visibility in imaging modalities used in oral cancer radiation therapy (RT) planning routine.

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eik Schiegnitz ◽  
Lena Katharina Müller ◽  
Keyvan Sagheb ◽  
Lisa Theis ◽  
Vahide Cagiran ◽  
...  

Abstract Background and purpose The aim of this clinical study was to investigate the clinical long-term and patient-reported outcome of dental implants in patients with oral cancer. In addition, analysis of the influence of radiation therapy, timing of implant insertion, and augmentation procedures on implant survival was performed. Material and methods This retrospective study investigated the clinical outcome of 711 dental implants in 164 oral cancer patients, inserted by experienced surgeons of the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, University Medical Center Mainz, Germany. Oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) was evaluated. Results Cumulative 5-year and 10-year implant survival rates for all included implants were 87.3% and 80.0%. Implants placed straight after ablative surgery (primary implant placement) and implants placed after completing the oncologic treatment (secondary implant placement) showed a comparable implant survival (92.5% vs. 89.5%; p = 0.635). Irradiation therapy had no significant influence on implant survival of secondary placed implants (p = 0.929). However, regarding implant site (native bone vs. augmented bone) and radiation therapy (non-irradiated bone vs. irradiated bone), implants inserted in irradiated bone that received augmentation procedures showed a statistically significant lower implant survival (p < 0.001). Patients reported a distinct improvement in OHRQoL. Conclusions Promising long-term survival rates of dental implants in patients after treatment of oral cancer were seen. In addition, patients benefit in form of an improved OHRQoL. However, bone augmentation procedures in irradiated bone may result in an impaired implants’ prognosis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document