David Thomas1, James Lamb2, Benjamin White3, Shyam Jani2, Sergio Gaudio2, Percy Lee2, Dan Ruan2, Michael McNitt-Gray4, Daniel Low2. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California. Electronic address: dhthomas@mednet.ucla.edu. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, California. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 4. Department of Radiological Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To develop a novel 4-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) technique that exploits standard fast helical acquisition, a simultaneous breathing surrogate measurement, deformable image registration, and a breathing motion model to remove sorting artifacts. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten patients were imaged under free-breathing conditions 25 successive times in alternating directions with a 64-slice CT scanner using a low-dose fast helical protocol. An abdominal bellows was used as a breathing surrogate. Deformable registration was used to register the first image (defined as the reference image) to the subsequent 24 segmented images. Voxel-specific motion model parameters were determined using a breathing motion model. The tissue locations predicted by the motion model in the 25 images were compared against the deformably registered tissue locations, allowing a model prediction error to be evaluated. A low-noise image was created by averaging the 25 images deformed to the first image geometry, reducing statistical image noise by a factor of 5. The motion model was used to deform the low-noise reference image to any user-selected breathing phase. A voxel-specific correction was applied to correct the Hounsfield units for lung parenchyma density as a function of lung air filling. RESULTS: Images produced using the model at user-selected breathing phases did not suffer from sorting artifacts common to conventional 4D-CT protocols. The mean prediction error across all patients between the breathing motion model predictions and the measured lung tissue positions was determined to be 1.19 ± 0.37 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed technique can be used as a clinical 4D-CT technique. It is robust in the presence of irregular breathing and allows the entire imaging dose to contribute to the resulting image quality, providing sorting artifact-free images at a patient dose similar to or less than current 4D-CT techniques.
PURPOSE: To develop a novel 4-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) technique that exploits standard fast helical acquisition, a simultaneous breathing surrogate measurement, deformable image registration, and a breathing motion model to remove sorting artifacts. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten patients were imaged under free-breathing conditions 25 successive times in alternating directions with a 64-slice CT scanner using a low-dose fast helical protocol. An abdominal bellows was used as a breathing surrogate. Deformable registration was used to register the first image (defined as the reference image) to the subsequent 24 segmented images. Voxel-specific motion model parameters were determined using a breathing motion model. The tissue locations predicted by the motion model in the 25 images were compared against the deformably registered tissue locations, allowing a model prediction error to be evaluated. A low-noise image was created by averaging the 25 images deformed to the first image geometry, reducing statistical image noise by a factor of 5. The motion model was used to deform the low-noise reference image to any user-selected breathing phase. A voxel-specific correction was applied to correct the Hounsfield units for lung parenchyma density as a function of lung air filling. RESULTS: Images produced using the model at user-selected breathing phases did not suffer from sorting artifacts common to conventional 4D-CT protocols. The mean prediction error across all patients between the breathing motion model predictions and the measured lung tissue positions was determined to be 1.19 ± 0.37 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed technique can be used as a clinical 4D-CT technique. It is robust in the presence of irregular breathing and allows the entire imaging dose to contribute to the resulting image quality, providing sorting artifact-free images at a patient dose similar to or less than current 4D-CT techniques.
Authors: Keith L Miller; Timothy D Shafman; Mitchell S Anscher; Su-Min Zhou; Robert W Clough; Jennifer L Garst; Jeffrey Crawford; Julian Rosenman; Mark A Socinski; William Blackstock; Gregory S Sibley; Lawrence B Marks Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-01-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Wei Lu; Daniel A Low; Parag J Parikh; Michelle M Nystrom; Issam M El Naqa; Sasha H Wahab; Maureen Handoko; David Fooshee; Jeffrey D Bradley Journal: Med Phys Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Joyatee Sarker; Alan Chu; Kit Mui; John A Wolfgang; Ariel E Hirsch; George T Y Chen; Gregory C Sharp Journal: Med Phys Date: 2010-03 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Daniel A Low; Parag J Parikh; Wei Lu; James F Dempsey; Sasha H Wahab; James P Hubenschmidt; Michelle M Nystrom; Maureen Handoko; Jeffrey D Bradley Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-11-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Dylan P O'Connell; David H Thomas; Tai H Dou; James M Lamb; Franklin Feingold; Daniel A Low; Matthew K Fuld; Jered P Sieren; Chelsea M Sloan; Melissa A Shirk; Eric A Hoffman; Christian Hofmann Journal: Med Phys Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Yuncheng Zhong; Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy; Liyuan Chen; Nick Myziuk; Richard Castillo; Edward Castillo; Thomas Guerrero; Steve Jiang; Jing Wang Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-03-12 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Tai H Dou; David H Thomas; Dylan O'Connell; Jeffrey D Bradley; James M Lamb; Daniel A Low Journal: Med Phys Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: David H Thomas; Jun Tan; Jack Neylon; Tai Dou; Dylan O'Connell; Michael McNitt-Gray; Percy Lee; James Lamb; Daniel A Low Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2017-11-21 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Tai H Dou; David H Thomas; Dylan P O'Connell; James M Lamb; Percy Lee; Daniel A Low Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jamie R McClelland; Marc Modat; Simon Arridge; Helen Grimes; Derek D'Souza; David Thomas; Dylan O' Connell; Daniel A Low; Evangelia Kaza; David J Collins; Martin O Leach; David J Hawkes Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2017-02-14 Impact factor: 3.609