Literature DB >> 18031854

A quantitative image quality comparison of four different image guided radiotherapy devices.

Julia Stützel1, Uwe Oelfke, Simeon Nill.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: A study to quantitatively compare the image quality of four different image guided radiotherapy (IGRT) devices based on phantom measurements with respect to the additional dose delivered to the patient.
METHODS: Images of three different head-sized phantoms (diameter 16-18 cm) were acquired with the following four IGRT-CT solutions: (i) the Siemens Primatom single slice fan beam computed tomography (CT) scanner with an acceleration voltage of 130 kV, (ii) a Tomotherapy HI-ART II unit using a fan beam scanner with an energy of 3.5 MeV and (iii) the Siemens Artíste prototype, providing the possibility to perform kV (121 kV) and MV (6 MV) cone beam (CB) CTs. For each device three scan protocols (named low, normal, high) were selected to yield the same weighted computed tomography dose index (CTDI(w)). Based on the individual inserts of the different phantoms the image quality achieved with each device at a certain dose level was characterized in terms of homogeneity, spatial resolution, signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) and electron density-to-CT-number conversion.
RESULTS: Based on the current findings for head-sized phantoms all devices show an electron density-to-CT-number conversion almost independent of the imaging parameters and hence can be suited for treatment planning purposes. The evaluation of the image quality, however, points out clear differences due to the different energies and geometries. The Primatom standard CT scanner shows throughout the best performance, especially for soft tissue contrast and spatial resolution with low imaging doses. Reasonable soft tissue contrast can be obtained with slightly higher doses compared to the CT scanner with the kVCB and the Tomotherapy unit. In order to get similar results with the MVCB system a much higher dose needs to be applied to the patient.
CONCLUSION: Considering the entire investigations, especially in terms of contrast and spatial resolution, a rough tendency for decreasing image quality can be given: Primatom, Artíste prototype kVCB, Tomotherapy, Artíste prototype MVCB.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18031854     DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2007.10.035

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


  19 in total

1.  Dosimetric integration of daily mega-voltage cone-beam CT for image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy.

Authors:  A Zabel-du Bois; S Nill; S Ulrich; U Oelfke; B Rhein; P Haering; S Milker-Zabel; A Schwahofer
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2012-01-05       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  Accuracy estimation for projection-to-volume targeting during rotational therapy: a feasibility study.

Authors:  Yong Long; Jeffrey A Fessler; James M Balter
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Evaluation of mechanical and geometric accuracy of two different image guidance systems in radiotherapy.

Authors:  Nithya Kanakavelu; Anand Mambakam Ravindran; Emmanvelrajan James Jebaseelan Samuel
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2016-01-04

4.  Image quality and dose distributions of three linac-based imaging modalities.

Authors:  Yvonne Dzierma; Evemarie Ames; Frank Nuesken; Jan Palm; Norbert Licht; Christian Rübe
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2014-12-20       Impact factor: 3.621

5.  New multileaf collimator with a leaf width of 5 mm improves plan quality compared to 10 mm in step-and-shoot IMRT of HNC using integrated boost procedure.

Authors:  Felix Zwicker; Henrik Hauswald; Simeon Nill; Bernhard Rhein; Christian Thieke; Falk Roeder; Carmen Timke; Angelika Zabel-du Bois; Jürgen Debus; Peter E Huber
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2010-05-21       Impact factor: 3.621

6.  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

7.  Interfractional variability in intensity-modulated radiotherapy of prostate cancer with or without thermoplastic pelvic immobilization.

Authors:  J A Lee; C Y Kim; Y J Park; W S Yoon; N K Lee; D S Yang
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2013-11-08       Impact factor: 3.621

8.  Comparison of various online IGRT strategies: The benefits of online treatment plan re-optimization.

Authors:  Derek Schulze; Jian Liang; Di Yan; Tiezhi Zhang
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2008-10-29       Impact factor: 6.280

9.  Dosimetric benefit to organs at risk following margin reductions in nasopharyngeal carcinoma treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

Authors:  Yan-Ping Mao; Wen-Jing Yin; Rui Guo; Guang-Shun Zhang; Jian-Lan Fang; Feng Chi; Zhen-Yu Qi; Meng-Zhong Liu; Jun Ma; Ying Sun
Journal:  Chin J Cancer       Date:  2015-05-20

10.  Comparison of measurement methods with a mixed effects procedure accounting for replicated evaluations (COM3PARE): method comparison algorithm implementation for head and neck IGRT positional verification.

Authors:  Anuradha Roy; Clifton D Fuller; David I Rosenthal; Charles R Thomas
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2015-08-28       Impact factor: 1.930

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.