Literature DB >> 16253772

Automatic prostate localization on cone-beam CT scans for high precision image-guided radiotherapy.

Monique H P Smitsmans1, Josien de Bois, Jan-Jakob Sonke, Anja Betgen, Lambert J Zijp, David A Jaffray, Joos V Lebesque, Marcel van Herk.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Previously, we developed an automatic three-dimensional gray-value registration (GR) method for fast prostate localization that could be used during online or offline image-guided radiotherapy. The method was tested on conventional computed tomography (CT) scans. In this study, the performance of the algorithm to localize the prostate on cone-beam CT (CBCT) scans acquired on the treatment machine was evaluated. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Five to 17 CBCT scans of 32 prostate cancer patients (332 scans in total) were used. For 18 patients (190 CBCT scans), the CBCT scans were acquired with a collimated field of view (FOV) (craniocaudal). This procedure improved the image quality considerably. The prostate (i.e., prostate plus seminal vesicles) in each CBCT scan was registered to the prostate in the planning CT scan by automatic 3D gray-value registration (normal GR) starting from a registration on the bony anatomy. When these failed, registrations were repeated with a fixed rotation point locked at the prostate apex (fixed apex GR). Registrations were visually assessed in 3D by one observer with the help of an expansion (by 3.6 mm) of the delineated prostate contours of the planning CT scan. The percentage of successfully registered cases was determined from the combined normal and fixed apex GR assessment results. The error in gray-value registration for both registration methods was determined from the position of one clearly defined calcification in the prostate gland (9 patients, 71 successful registrations).
RESULTS: The percentage of successfully registered CBCT scans that were acquired with a collimated FOV was about 10% higher than for CBCT scans that were acquired with an uncollimated FOV. For CBCT scans that were acquired with a collimated FOV, the percentage of successfully registered cases improved from 65%, when only normal GR was applied, to 83% when the results of normal and fixed apex GR were combined. Gray-value registration mainly failed (or registrations were difficult to assess) because of streaks in the CBCT scans caused by moving gas pockets in the rectum during CBCT image acquisition (i.e., intrafraction motion). The error in gray-value registration along the left-right, craniocaudal, and anteroposterior axes was 1.0, 2.4, and 2.3 mm (1 SD) for normal GR, and 1.0, 2.0, and 1.7 mm (1 SD) for fixed apex GR. The systematic and random components of these SDs contributed approximately equally to these SDs, for both registration methods.
CONCLUSIONS: The feasibility of automatic prostate localization on CBCT scans acquired on the treatment machine using an adaptation of the previously developed three-dimensional gray-value registration algorithm, has been validated in this study. Collimating the FOV during CBCT image acquisition improved the CBCT image quality considerably. Artifacts in the CBCT images caused by large moving gas pockets during CBCT image acquisition were the main cause for unsuccessful registration. From this study, we can conclude that CBCT scans are suitable for online and offline position verification of the prostate, as long as the amount of nonstationary gas is limited.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16253772     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2005.07.973

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  43 in total

1.  A pseudoinverse deformation vector field generator and its applications.

Authors:  C Yan; H Zhong; M Murphy; E Weiss; J V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  A novel approach for establishing benchmark CBCT/CT deformable image registrations in prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Authors:  Jinkoo Kim; Sanath Kumar; Chang Liu; Hualiang Zhong; Deepak Pradhan; Mira Shah; Richard Cattaneo; Raphael Yechieli; Jared R Robbins; Mohamed A Elshaikh; Indrin J Chetty
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-10-31       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 3.  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

4.  Online updating of context-aware landmark detectors for prostate localization in daily treatment CT images.

Authors:  Xiubin Dai; Yaozong Gao; Dinggang Shen
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Registration accuracy for MR images of the prostate using a subvolume based registration protocol.

Authors:  Joakim H Jonsson; Patrik Brynolfsson; Anders Garpebring; Mikael Karlsson; Karin Söderström; Tufve Nyholm
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2011-06-16       Impact factor: 3.481

6.  Investigation into image quality and dose for different patient geometries with multiple cone-beam CT systems.

Authors:  Stephen J Gardner; Matthew T Studenski; Tawfik Giaddui; Yunfeng Cui; James Galvin; Yan Yu; Ying Xiao
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Accuracy in automatic image registration between MV cone beam computed tomography and planning kV computed tomography in image guided radiotherapy.

Authors:  Nithya Kanakavelu; E James Jebaseelan Samuel
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2016-07-22

8.  Clinical evaluation of soft tissue organ boundary visualization on cone-beam computed tomographic imaging.

Authors:  Elisabeth Weiss; Jian Wu; William Sleeman; Joshua Bryant; Priya Mitra; Michael Myers; Tatjana Ivanova; Nitai Mukhopadhyay; Viswanathan Ramakrishnan; Martin Murphy; Jeffrey Williamson
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2010-06-09       Impact factor: 7.038

9.  Improved cone-beam computed tomography in supine and prone breast radiotherapy. Surface reconstruction, radiation exposure, and clinical workflow.

Authors:  A De Puysseleyr; T Mulliez; A Gulyban; E Bogaert; T Vercauteren; T Van Hoof; J Van de Velde; R Van Den Broecke; C De Wagter; W De Neve
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2013-10-03       Impact factor: 3.621

10.  Image quality and stability of image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) devices: A comparative study.

Authors:  Markus Stock; Marlies Pasler; Wolfgang Birkfellner; Peter Homolka; Richard Poetter; Dietmar Georg
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2009-08-18       Impact factor: 6.280

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.