Literature DB >> 24331666

Phantom and clinical study of differences in cone beam computed tomographic registration when aligned to maximum and average intensity projection.

Kiyonori Shirai1, Kinji Nishiyama2, Toshizo Katsuda3, Teruki Teshima1, Yoshihiro Ueda1, Masayoshi Miyazaki1, Katsutomo Tsujii1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine whether maximum or average intensity projection (MIP or AIP, respectively) reconstructed from 4-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) is preferred for alignment to cone beam CT (CBCT) images in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Stationary CT and 4DCT images were acquired with a target phantom at the center of motion and moving along the superior-inferior (SI) direction, respectively. Motion profiles were asymmetrical waveforms with amplitudes of 10, 15, and 20 mm and a 4-second cycle. Stationary CBCT and dynamic CBCT images were acquired in the same manner as stationary CT and 4DCT images. Stationary CBCT was aligned to stationary CT, and the couch position was used as the baseline. Dynamic CBCT was aligned to the MIP and AIP of corresponding amplitudes. Registration error was defined as the SI deviation of the couch position from the baseline. In 16 patients with isolated lung lesions, free-breathing CBCT (FBCBCT) was registered to AIP and MIP (64 sessions in total), and the difference in couch shifts was calculated.
RESULTS: In the phantom study, registration errors were within 0.1 mm for AIP and 1.5 to 1.8 mm toward the inferior direction for MIP. In the patient study, the difference in the couch shifts (mean, range) was insignificant in the right-left (0.0 mm, ≤1.0 mm) and anterior-posterior (0.0 mm, ≤2.1 mm) directions. In the SI direction, however, the couch position significantly shifted in the inferior direction after MIP registration compared with after AIP registration (mean, -0.6 mm; ranging 1.7 mm to the superior side and 3.5 mm to the inferior side, P=.02).
CONCLUSIONS: AIP is recommended as the reference image for registration to FBCBCT when target alignment is performed in the presence of asymmetrical respiratory motion, whereas MIP causes systematic target positioning error.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24331666     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.09.031

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


  7 in total

1.  The importance of surrounding tissues and window settings for contouring of moving targets.

Authors:  Kai Joachim Borm; Markus Oechsner; Johannes Berndt; Stephanie Elisabeth Combs; Michael Molls; Marciana Nona Duma
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2015-06-19       Impact factor: 3.621

2.  Interobserver variability of patient positioning using four different CT datasets for image registration in lung stereotactic body radiotherapy.

Authors:  Markus Oechsner; Barbara Chizzali; Michal Devecka; Stefan Münch; Stephanie Elisabeth Combs; Jan Jakob Wilkens; Marciana Nona Duma
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2017-07-19       Impact factor: 3.621

3.  Dosimetric impact of different CT datasets for stereotactic treatment planning using 3D conformal radiotherapy or volumetric modulated arc therapy.

Authors:  Markus Oechsner; Leonhard Odersky; Johannes Berndt; Stephanie Elisabeth Combs; Jan Jakob Wilkens; Marciana Nona Duma
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-12-01       Impact factor: 3.481

4.  Registration uncertainties between 3D cone beam computed tomography and different reference CT datasets in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy.

Authors:  Markus Oechsner; Barbara Chizzali; Michal Devecka; Stephanie Elisabeth Combs; Jan Jakob Wilkens; Marciana Nona Duma
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2016-10-26       Impact factor: 3.481

5.  Effects of irregular respiratory motion on the positioning accuracy of moving target with free breathing cone-beam computerized tomography.

Authors:  Xiang Li; Tianfang Li; Ellen Yorke; Gig Mageras; Xiaoli Tang; Maria Chan; Weijun Xiong; Marsha Reyngold; Richard Gewanter; Abraham Wu; John Cuaron; Margie Hunt
Journal:  Int J Med Phys Clin Eng Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-05-08

6.  VMAT-SBRT planning based on an average intensity projection for lung tumors located in close proximity to the diaphragm: a phantom and clinical validity study.

Authors:  Shingo Ohira; Yoshihiro Ueda; Misaki Hashimoto; Masayoshi Miyazaki; Masaru Isono; Hiroshi Kamikaseda; Akira Masaoka; Masaaki Takashina; Masahiko Koizumi; Teruki Teshima
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2015-09-28       Impact factor: 2.724

7.  Inter- and intrafractional setup errors and baseline shifts of fiducial markers in patients with liver tumors receiving free-breathing postoperative radiation analyzed by cone-beam computed tomography.

Authors:  Tao Zhang; Weihu Wang; Yexiong Li; Jing Jin; Shulian Wang; Yongwen Song; Yueping Liu
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.