Kiyonori Shirai1, Kinji Nishiyama2, Toshizo Katsuda3, Teruki Teshima1, Yoshihiro Ueda1, Masayoshi Miyazaki1, Katsutomo Tsujii1. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases, Osaka, Japan. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases, Osaka, Japan. Electronic address: sirai-ki@mc.pref.osaka.jp. 3. Department of Radiology, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center, Osaka, Japan.
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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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