Literature DB >> 15036848

Quantification of local rectal wall displacements by virtual rectum unfolding.

Mischa S Hoogeman1, Marcel van Herk, Josien de Bois, Pietje Muller-Timmermans, Peter C M Koper, Joos V Lebesque.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: To develop a method to project surface elements of a bent tubular organ, e.g. the rectum, in order to create a two-dimensional (2D) map and to use this method to quantify on a local scale shape and position variations of the rectum. PATIENTS AND METHODS: For this study we used data of 19 patients, who each received a planning CT scan and 9-13 repeat CT scans that were considered representative for the radiotherapy course. We combined maps from multiple CT scans of the same patient to quantify local rectal wall displacements. To make a map we first computed a central axis through the rectum and divided it into segments of equal length assuming that the length of these segments was invariant under rectum shape and position changes. Next, we constructed for each segment a planar cross section through the rectum, which was oriented orthogonally to that segment. The amount of rectal wall tissue was assumed to be constant in all orthogonal cross sections throughout the entire rectum. We unfolded the cross-sected rectal wall at the dorsal side and projected either the associated dose or the coordinates onto the map.
RESULTS: The largest variation in the position of the rectal wall during the treatment course occurred at the upper anterior, left and right side (1 SD=5-7 mm). Near the anus the variation was <3 mm (1 SD) and at the posterior side of the rectum <4 mm (1 SD). The anterior-posterior (AP) and left-right displacements between the rectum in the planning CT scan and the mean rectum shape during the treatment were localized between 40 and 80% of the central axis. At the upper anterior, left, and right side the displacements were 5-8 mm (1 SD). These rectal wall displacements correlated with the rectum volume in the planning CT scan. At the upper anterior side the correlation coefficient between the AP displacements and the planning rectum volume was 0.85.
CONCLUSIONS: We quantified variations in rectum shape and in dose in the rectal wall. The systematic error in rectal wall position was found to be larger than the random shape and position variations. We successfully developed a method to virtually unfold a rectum and to project the dose onto a 2D map. The spatial information of the dose distribution can be used in the analysis of rectum complications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15036848     DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2003.11.015

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  7 in total

1.  Preliminary experience of a predictive model to define rectal volume and rectal dose during the treatment of prostate cancer.

Authors:  M D Falco; M D'Andrea; D Fedele; R Barbarino; M Benassi; E Giudice; E Hamoud; G Ingrosso; P Ladogana; F Santarelli; G Tortorelli; R Santoni
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Prospective randomized double-blind pilot study of site-specific consensus atlas implementation for rectal cancer target volume delineation in the cooperative group setting.

Authors:  Clifton D Fuller; Jasper Nijkamp; Joop C Duppen; Coen R N Rasch; Charles R Thomas; Samuel J Wang; Paul Okunieff; William E Jones; Daniel Baseman; Shilpen Patel; Carlo G N Demandante; Anna M Harris; Benjamin D Smith; Alan W Katz; Camille McGann; Jennifer L Harper; Daniel T Chang; Stephen Smalley; David T Marshall; Karyn A Goodman; Niko Papanikolaou; Lisa A Kachnic
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-04-18       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 3.  Exploiting biological and physical determinants of radiotherapy toxicity to individualize treatment.

Authors:  J E Scaife; G C Barnett; D J Noble; R Jena; S J Thomas; C M L West; N G Burnet
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-05-26       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Random variation in rectal position during radiotherapy for prostate cancer is two to three times greater than that predicted from prostate motion.

Authors:  J Scaife; K Harrison; M Romanchikova; A Parker; M Sutcliffe; S Bond; S Thomas; S Freeman; R Jena; A Bates; N Burnet
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-08-20       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Accumulated dose to the rectum, measured using dose-volume histograms and dose-surface maps, is different from planned dose in all patients treated with radiotherapy for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jessica E Scaife; Simon J Thomas; Karl Harrison; Marina Romanchikova; Michael P F Sutcliffe; Julia R Forman; Amy M Bates; Raj Jena; M Andrew Parker; Neil G Burnet
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-07-24       Impact factor: 3.039

6.  Analyses of regional radiosensitivity of white matter structures along tract axes using novel white matter segmentation and diffusion imaging biomarkers.

Authors:  Jordan Houri; Roshan Karunamuni; Michael Connor; Niclas Pettersson; Carrie McDonald; Nikdokht Farid; Nathan White; Anders Dale; Jona A Hattangadi-Gluth; Vitali Moiseenko
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-05-01

7.  Ano-rectal wall dose-surface maps localize the dosimetric benefit of hydrogel rectum spacers in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Authors:  Ben G L Vanneste; Florian Buettner; Michael Pinkawa; Philippe Lambin; Aswin L Hoffmann
Journal:  Clin Transl Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-11-03
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.