Urology
Volume 73, Issue 2 , Pages 369-373, February 2009

Prostate Brachytherapy After Ileal Pouch–Anal Anastomosis Reconstruction

  • Richard Williamson

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh, School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
  • ,
  • Marc C. Smaldone

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh, School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Marc C. Smaldone, M.D., Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh, School of Medicine, Suite 700, 3471 Fifth Ave, Pittsburgh, PA 15213
  • ,
  • Erin P. Gibbons

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh, School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
  • ,
  • Ryan P. Smith

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh, Medical Center, Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
  • ,
  • Sushil Beriwal

      Affiliations

    • Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pittsburgh, Medical Center, Cancer Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
  • ,
  • Ronald M. Benoit

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, University of Pittsburgh, School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Received 28 April 2008; accepted 28 June 2008. published online 18 August 2008.

Objective

To determine the safety of prostate brachytherapy in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer who have undergone proctocolectomy with ileal pouch–anal anastomosis (IPAA).

Methods

We performed a retrospective chart review of patients with a prior history of IPAA reconstruction who underwent prostate brachytherapy at our institution. Clinical records were reviewed for demographic characteristics, postoperative dosimetry, changes in bowel function, and oncologic outcomes. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results

Five patients with an IPAA underwent prostate brachytherapy for clinically localized prostate cancer. Mean time from colorectal reconstruction to prostate brachytherapy was 6.3 years. Adequate dosimetry (mean D90 114.9%, mean V100 91.1%, mean R100 0.76 mL) was achieved in each patient. Bowel frequency worsened in the immediate postoperative period in all patients, but all patients returned to their baseline bowel pattern by 4 months after their procedure. Serious complications, such as J-pouch ulcers, fistulas, or fecal incontinence, did not occur in these patients.

Conclusions

Prostate brachytherapy is a safe treatment option in patients with clinically localized prostate cancer and a history of proctocolectomy and IPAA reconstruction.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0090-4295(08)00845-5

doi:10.1016/j.urology.2008.06.052

Urology
Volume 73, Issue 2 , Pages 369-373, February 2009