Computer estimation of dosage of interstitial and intracavitary implants.

TL;DR: Neither peroral nor transvaginal intracavitary teletherapy, nor the interstitial injection of colloidal radioactive suspensions has been shown to be other than a poor substitute for carefully planned and executed intracvitary applicator or interstitial needle treatment of the same conditions.

Abstract: THE ADVANTAGES of intracavitary and interstitial radiation therapy have been long acknowledged. In both oral and pelvic carcinomas, which are a considerable fraction of the curable lesions seen by the radiation therapist, the most significant therapeutic contribution toward control is exemplary intracavitary or interstitial radiation therapy (1–6). Neither peroral nor transvaginal intracavitary teletherapy, nor the interstitial injection of colloidal radioactive suspensions has been shown to be other than a poor substitute for carefully planned and executed intracavitary applicator or interstitial needle treatment of the same conditions. In spite of technical advances, i.e., afterloading (7), Ir192 (8), etc., the use of these forms of radium or isotope therapy has not progressed commensurately with other advances in radiation therapy. This is most probably because of the therapist's difficulty in learning the technics and dose distribution of implants without subjecting a number of patients to less than a...