119 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 20932692)
1. Influence of prostatic edema on 131Cs permanent prostate seed implants: a dosimetric and radiobiological study.
Kehwar TS; Jones HA; Huq MS; Smith RP
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2011 Jun; 80(2):621-7. PubMed ID: 20932692
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Effect of edema associated with 131Cs prostate permanent seed implants on dosimetric quality indices.
Kehwar TS; Jones HA; Huq MS; Beriwal S; Benoit RM; Smith RP
Med Phys; 2009 Aug; 36(8):3536-42. PubMed ID: 19746787
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Optimum timing for image-based dose evaluation of 125I and 103PD prostate seed implants.
Yue N; Chen Z; Peschel R; Dicker AP; Waterman FM; Nath R
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1999 Nov; 45(4):1063-72. PubMed ID: 10571216
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. A dynamic model for the estimation of optimum timing of computed tomography scan for dose evaluation of 125I or 103Pd seed implant of prostate.
Yue N; Dicker AP; Corn BW; Nath R; Waterman FM
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1999 Jan; 43(2):447-54. PubMed ID: 10030274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Planning based on postneedle volume with early dosimetric assessment is beneficial for Cesium-131 permanent prostate seed implantation.
Smith RP; Beriwal S; Komanduri K; Gibbons E; Benoit R
Brachytherapy; 2008; 7(3):237-41. PubMed ID: 18599357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Prescription dose in permanent (131)Cs seed prostate implants.
Yue N; Heron DE; Komanduri K; Huq MS
Med Phys; 2005 Aug; 32(8):2496-502. PubMed ID: 16193779
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Potential impact of prostate edema on the dosimetry of permanent seed implants using the new 131Cs (model CS-1) seeds.
Chen Z; Deng J; Roberts K; Nath R
Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):968-75. PubMed ID: 16696473
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Moving toward focal therapy in prostate cancer: dual-isotope permanent seed implants as a possible solution.
Todor DA; Barani IJ; Lin PS; Anscher MS
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2011 Sep; 81(1):297-304. PubMed ID: 21536392
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Impact of postimplant edema on V(100) and D(90) in prostate brachytherapy: can implant quality be predicted on day 0?
Waterman FM; Dicker AP
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2002 Jul; 53(3):610-21. PubMed ID: 12062604
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Biologically effective dose for permanent prostate brachytherapy taking into account postimplant edema.
Van Gellekom MP; Moerland MA; Kal HB; Battermann JJ
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2002 Jun; 53(2):422-33. PubMed ID: 12023147
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Effect of prostatic edema on CT-based postimplant dosimetry.
Dogan N; Mohideen N; Glasgow GP; Keys K; Flanigan RC
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2002 Jun; 53(2):483-9. PubMed ID: 12023153
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Rectal-wall dose dependence on postplan timing after permanent-seed prostate brachytherapy.
Taussky D; Yeung I; Williams T; Pearson S; McLean M; Pond G; Crook J
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2006 Jun; 65(2):358-63. PubMed ID: 16563654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Timing of computed tomography-based postimplant assessment following permanent transperineal prostate brachytherapy.
Prestidge BR; Bice WS; Kiefer EJ; Prete JJ
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 1998 Mar; 40(5):1111-5. PubMed ID: 9539566
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Relationship between isotope half-life and prostatic edema for optimal prostate dose coverage in permanent seed implants.
Villeneuve M; Leclerc G; Lessard E; Pouliot J; Beaulieu L
Med Phys; 2008 May; 35(5):1970-7. PubMed ID: 18561673
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. The impact of postimplant edema on the urethral dose in prostate brachytherapy.
Waterman FM; Dicker AP
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2000 Jun; 47(3):661-4. PubMed ID: 10837949
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Sequential evaluation of prostate edema after permanent seed prostate brachytherapy using CT-MRI fusion.
Taussky D; Austen L; Toi A; Yeung I; Williams T; Pearson S; McLean M; Pond G; Crook J
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2005 Jul; 62(4):974-80. PubMed ID: 15989997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Examining the relationship between pre- and postimplant geometry in prostate low-dose-rate brachytherapy and its correlation with dosimetric quality using the similarity concept.
Todor DA; Anscher MS; Karlin JD; Hagan MP
Brachytherapy; 2014; 13(5):471-80. PubMed ID: 25037911
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Greater postimplant swelling in small-volume prostate glands: implications for dosimetry, treatment planning, and operating room technique.
Chung E; Stenmark MH; Evans C; Narayana V; McLaughlin PW
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys; 2012 Apr; 82(5):1944-8. PubMed ID: 21640498
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Effect of edema, relative biological effectiveness, and dose heterogeneity on prostate brachytherapy.
Wang JZ; Mayr NA; Nag S; Montebello J; Gupta N; Samsami N; Kanellitsas C
Med Phys; 2006 Apr; 33(4):1025-32. PubMed ID: 16696479
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Prostatic edema in 125I permanent prostate implants: dynamical dosimetry taking volume changes into account.
Leclerc G; Lavallée MC; Roy R; Vigneault E; Beaulieu L
Med Phys; 2006 Mar; 33(3):574-83. PubMed ID: 16878561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
