Literature DB >> 12674227

Inclusion of organ deformation in dose calculations.

K K Brock1, D L McShan, R K Ten Haken, S J Hollister, L A Dawson, J M Balter.   

Abstract

A previously described system for modeling organ deformation using finite element analysis has been extended to permit dose calculation. Using this tool, the calculated dose to the liver during radiotherapy can be compared using a traditional static model (STATIC), a model including rigid body motion (RB), and finally a model that incorporates rigid body motion and deformation (RBD). A model of the liver, consisting of approximately 6000 tetrahedral finite elements distributed throughout the contoured volume, is created from the CT data obtained at exhale. A deformation map is then created to relate the liver in the exhale CT data to the liver in the inhale CT data. Six intermediate phase positions of each element are then calculated from their trajectories. The coordinates of the centroid of each element at each phase are used to determine the dose received. These intermediate dose values are then time weighted according to a population-modeled breathing pattern to determine the total dose to each element during treatment. This method has been tested on four patient datasets. The change in prescribed dose for each patient's actual tumor as well as a simulated tumor of the same size, located in the superior, intermediate, and inferior regions of the liver, was determined using a normal tissue complication model, maintaining a predicted probability of complications of 15%. The average change in prescribed dose from RBD to STATIC for simulated tumors in the superior, intermediate, and inferior regions are 4.0 (range 2.1 to 5.3), -3.6 (range -5.0 to -2.2), and -14.5 (range -27.0 to -10.0) Gy, respectively. The average change in prescribed dose for the patient's actual tumor was -0.4 Gy (range -4.1 to 1.7 Gy). The average change in prescribed dose from RBD to RB for simulated tumors in the superior, intermediate, and inferior regions are -0.04 (range -2.4 to 2.2), 0.2 (range -1.5 to 1.9), and 3.9 (range 0.8 to 7.3) Gy, respectively. The average change in the prescribed dose for the patient's actual tumor was 0.7 Gy (range 0.2 to 1.1 Gy). This patient sampling indicates the potential importance of including deformation in dose calculations.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12674227     DOI: 10.1118/1.1539039

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  19 in total

1.  A novel technique to enable experimental validation of deformable dose accumulation.

Authors:  Carolyn J Niu; Warren D Foltz; Michael Velec; Joanne L Moseley; Adil Al-Mayah; Kristy K Brock
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Four-dimensional radiotherapeutic dose calculation using biomechanical respiratory motion description.

Authors:  Petru Manescu; Hamid Ladjal; Joseph Azencot; Michael Beuve; Etienne Testa; Behzad Shariat
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2013-09-01       Impact factor: 2.924

Review 3.  Radiation-associated liver injury.

Authors:  Charlie C Pan; Brian D Kavanagh; Laura A Dawson; X Allen Li; Shiva K Das; Moyed Miften; Randall K Ten Haken
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-03-01       Impact factor: 7.038

4.  Measurement of mechanical properties of rectal wall.

Authors:  Y Qiao; E Pan; S S Chakravarthula; F Han; J Liang; S Gudlavalleti
Journal:  J Mater Sci Mater Med       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 3.896

Review 5.  kV cone-beam CT-based IGRT: a clinical review.

Authors:  Judit Boda-Heggemann; Frank Lohr; Frederik Wenz; Michael Flentje; Matthias Guckenberger
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 3.621

6.  A distance to dose difference tool for estimating the required spatial accuracy of a displacement vector field.

Authors:  Nahla K Saleh-Sayah; Elisabeth Weiss; Francisco J Salguero; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 7.  Head and Neck Cancer Adaptive Radiation Therapy (ART): Conceptual Considerations for the Informed Clinician.

Authors:  Jolien Heukelom; Clifton David Fuller
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 5.934

8.  Effect of breathing motion on radiotherapy dose accumulation in the abdomen using deformable registration.

Authors:  Michael Velec; Joanne L Moseley; Cynthia L Eccles; Tim Craig; Michael B Sharpe; Laura A Dawson; Kristy K Brock
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-08-21       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Biological impact of geometric uncertainties: what margin is needed for intra-hepatic tumors?

Authors:  Hsiang-Chi Kuo; Wen-Shan Liu; Andrew Wu; Dennis Mah; Keh-Shih Chuang; Linda Hong; Ravi Yaparpalvi; Chandan Guha; Shalom Kalnicki
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2010-06-03       Impact factor: 3.481

10.  Effect of deformable registration uncertainty on lung SBRT dose accumulation.

Authors:  Navid Samavati; Michael Velec; Kristy K Brock
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 4.071

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.