PO115: Air Gaps in Perioperative Interstitial Breast Brachytherapy: Report of Two Cases.

Perioperative accelerated partial breast irradiation with multicatheter interstitial brachytherapy is an alternative to the postoperative option that offers advantages in terms of specificity and comfort for patients as it avoids a second procedure. Since the simulation CT scan is performed 48 hours after the intervention, immediate tissue changes as air gaps can occasionally be observed. To our knowledge, there is no literature published on this regard, so the aim of this study was to assess the impact of significant air gaps when planning and treating multicatheter perioperative breast cancer brachytherapy. Two consecutive cases with air gaps > 6 cc were included. For each case, a planning CT scan was performed 48 hours after the surgical procedure (tumorectomy + catheter insertion). Treatment planning was performed according to the department protocol and administered in an ultra-fractionated scheme: 3 fractions of 745 cGy every 12 hours. A second CT scan was performed right after the last treatment fraction, before the catheter removal. The air gaps have been contoured in both pre and post-treatment CTs and their volumes have been compared. The scans have been fused and the dosimetric differences have been evaluated. A total of 13 catheters have been analyzed in both scans. A volume reduction (-10% and -30% for each case) has been observed in the post-treatment air gap. Of the 13 catheters compared in the CT scans fusion, the catheter position displacement inside CTV was ≤ 1.5 mm in 12 of them (median displacement 1 mm), with one catheter displaced 2.7 mm in the post-treatment CT. Mean CTVD90 and V100 variation in the pre and post-treatment scans were -1.5 and -1.7% respectively. Dose variations in surrounding organs were: Skin Dmax -10 and -3%, Ribs Dmax +15 and +15% and Ipsilateral Lung Dmax +12 and +13%. Dosimetric disparities did not exceed tolerance and coverage limits in any case. With two cases analyzed, the volumetric reduction of the air gaps does not seem to affect the geometry of the implants, with most of the catheters remaining stable in their initial position. Discrete changes in the coverage parameters and doses to OARs fulfill the pre-established constraints. The confirmation of these results as well as the clinical relevance of these changes has to be examined in future studies including more patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]