Literature DB >> 22543214

Cone beam computed tomography number errors and consequences for radiotherapy planning: an investigation of correction methods.

Gavin G Poludniowski1, Philip M Evans, Steve Webb.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The potential of keV cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) for guiding adaptive replanning is well-known. There are impediments to this, one being CBCT number accuracy. The purpose of this study was to investigate CBCT number correction methods and the affect of residual inaccuracies on dose deposition. Four different correction strategies were applied to the same patient data to compare performance and the sophistication of correction-method needed for acceptable dose errors. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Planning CT and CBCT reconstructions were used for 12 patients (6 brain, 3 prostate, and 3 bladder cancer patients). All patients were treated using Elekta linear accelerators and XVI imaging systems. Two of the CBCT number correction methods investigated were based on an algorithm previously proposed by the authors but only previously applied to phantoms. Two further methods, based on an approach previously suggested in the research literature, were also examined. Dose calculations were performed using scans of a "worst" subset of patients using the Pinnacle³ version 9.0 treatment planning system and the patients' clinical plans.
RESULTS: All mean errors in CBCT number were <50 HU, and all correction methods performed well or adequately in dose calculations. The worst single dose discrepancy identified for any of the examined methods or patients was 3.0%. Mean errors in the doses to treatment volumes or organs at risk were negatively correlated with the mean error in CT number. That is, a mean CT number that was too large, averaged over the entire CBCT volume, implied an underdosing in a volume-of-interest and vice versa.
CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that (1) the correction of CBCT numbers to within a mean error of 50 HU in the scan volume provides acceptable discrepancies in dose (<3%) and (2) this is achievable with even quite unsophisticated correction methods.
Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22543214     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.02.019

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


  18 in total

1.  Hounsfield units variations: impact on CT-density based conversion tables and their effects on dose distribution.

Authors:  B Zurl; R Tiefling; P Winkler; P Kindl; K S Kapp
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2013-11-09       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  Can CT scan protocols used for radiotherapy treatment planning be adjusted to optimize image quality and patient dose? A systematic review.

Authors:  Anne T Davis; Antony L Palmer; Andrew Nisbet
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-05-23       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Automated algorithm for CBCT-based dose calculations of prostate radiotherapy with bilateral hip prostheses.

Authors:  Turki Almatani; Richard P Hugtenburg; Ryan D Lewis; Susan E Barley; Mark A Edwards
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  Extended localization and adaptive dose calculation using HU corrected cone beam CT: Phantom study.

Authors:  K Mohamathu Rafic; S Amalan; B S Timothy Peace; B Paul Ravindran
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2018-02-24

5.  Feasibility of improving cone-beam CT number consistency using a scatter correction algorithm.

Authors:  Jun Li; Weiguang Yao; Ying Xiao; Yan Yu
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2013-11-04       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Using corrected cone-beam CT image for accelerated partial breast irradiation treatment dose verification: the preliminary experience.

Authors:  Jiazhou Wang; Weigang Hu; Gang Cai; Jiayuan Peng; Ziqiang Pan; Xiaomao Guo; Jiayi Chen
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2013-09-13       Impact factor: 3.481

7.  Assessment of the dosimetric accuracies of CATPhan 504 and CIRS 062 using kV-CBCT for performing direct calculations.

Authors:  James Kwame Annkah; Ivan Rosenberg; Naina Hindocha; Syed Ali Moinuddin; Kate Ricketts; Abiodun Adeyemi; Gary Royle
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2014-07

8.  Comparison of CT number calibration techniques for CBCT-based dose calculation.

Authors:  Alex Dunlop; Dualta McQuaid; Simeon Nill; Julia Murray; Gavin Poludniowski; Vibeke N Hansen; Shreerang Bhide; Christopher Nutting; Kevin Harrington; Kate Newbold; Uwe Oelfke
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2015-09-24       Impact factor: 3.621

9.  Implementation of an efficient Monte Carlo calculation for CBCT scatter correction: phantom study.

Authors:  Peter G F Watson; Ernesto Mainegra-Hing; Nada Tomic; Jan Seuntjens
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-07-08       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  Using the ACR CT accreditation phantom for routine image quality assurance on both CT and CBCT imaging systems in a radiotherapy environment.

Authors:  Maritza A Hobson; Emilie T Soisson; Stephen D Davis; William Parker
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-07-08       Impact factor: 2.102

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.