Literature DB >> 25471956

A three-dimensional head-and-neck phantom for validation of multimodality deformable image registration for adaptive radiotherapy.

Kamal Singhrao1, Neil Kirby1, Jean Pouliot1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To develop a three-dimensional (3D) deformable head-and-neck (H&N) phantom with realistic tissue contrast for both kilovoltage (kV) and megavoltage (MV) imaging modalities and use it to objectively evaluate deformable image registration (DIR) algorithms.
METHODS: The phantom represents H&N patient anatomy. It is constructed from thermoplastic, which becomes pliable in boiling water, and hardened epoxy resin. Using a system of additives, the Hounsfield unit (HU) values of these materials were tuned to mimic anatomy for both kV and MV imaging. The phantom opens along a sagittal midsection to reveal radiotransparent markers, which were used to characterize the phantom deformation. The deformed and undeformed phantoms were scanned with kV and MV imaging modalities. Additionally, a calibration curve was created to change the HUs of the MV scans to be similar to kV HUs, (MC). The extracted ground-truth deformation was then compared to the results of two commercially available DIR algorithms, from Velocity Medical Solutions and mim software.
RESULTS: The phantom produced a 3D deformation, representing neck flexion, with a magnitude of up to 8 mm and was able to represent tissue HUs for both kV and MV imaging modalities. The two tested deformation algorithms yielded vastly different results. For kV-kV registration, mim produced mean and maximum errors of 1.8 and 11.5 mm, respectively. These same numbers for Velocity were 2.4 and 7.1 mm, respectively. For MV-MV, kV-MV, and kV-MC Velocity produced similar mean and maximum error values. mim, however, produced gross errors for all three of these scenarios, with maximum errors ranging from 33.4 to 41.6 mm.
CONCLUSIONS: The application of DIR across different imaging modalities is particularly difficult, due to differences in tissue HUs and the presence of imaging artifacts. For this reason, DIR algorithms must be validated specifically for this purpose. The developed H&N phantom is an effective tool for this purpose.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25471956     DOI: 10.1118/1.4901523

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  12 in total

1.  Accuracy of deformable image registration on magnetic resonance images in digital and physical phantoms.

Authors:  Rachel B Ger; Jinzhong Yang; Yao Ding; Megan C Jacobsen; Clifton D Fuller; Rebecca M Howell; Heng Li; R Jason Stafford; Shouhao Zhou; Laurence E Court
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2017-07-18       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 2.  Head and Neck Cancer Adaptive Radiation Therapy (ART): Conceptual Considerations for the Informed Clinician.

Authors:  Jolien Heukelom; Clifton David Fuller
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 5.934

3.  Rigid and Deformable Image Registration for Radiation Therapy: A Self-Study Evaluation Guide for NRG Oncology Clinical Trial Participation.

Authors:  Yi Rong; Mihaela Rosu-Bubulac; Stanley H Benedict; Yunfeng Cui; Russell Ruo; Tanner Connell; Rojano Kashani; Kujtim Latifi; Quan Chen; Huaizhi Geng; Jason Sohn; Ying Xiao
Journal:  Pract Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-03-02

4.  Evaluation of the tool "Reg Refine" for user-guided deformable image registration.

Authors:  Perry B Johnson; Kyle R Padgett; Kuan L Chen; Nesrin Dogan
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-05-08       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Registration error of the liver CT using deformable image registration of MIM Maestro and Velocity AI.

Authors:  Nobuyoshi Fukumitsu; Kazunori Nitta; Toshiyuki Terunuma; Toshiyuki Okumura; Haruko Numajiri; Yoshiko Oshiro; Kayoko Ohnishi; Masashi Mizumoto; Teruhito Aihara; Hitoshi Ishikawa; Koji Tsuboi; Hideyuki Sakurai
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 1.930

6.  A Comparative Evaluation of 3 Different Free-Form Deformable Image Registration and Contour Propagation Methods for Head and Neck MRI: The Case of Parotid Changes During Radiotherapy.

Authors:  Sara Broggi; Elisa Scalco; Maria Luisa Belli; Gerlinde Logghe; Dirk Verellen; Stefano Moriconi; Anna Chiara; Anna Palmisano; Renata Mellone; Claudio Fiorino; Giovanna Rizzo
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2017-02-07

7.  The evaluation of a hybrid biomechanical deformable registration method on a multistage physical phantom with reproducible deformation.

Authors:  An Qin; Dan Ionascu; Jian Liang; Xiao Han; Nicolette O'Connell; Di Yan
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-12-04       Impact factor: 3.481

8.  Development of a physical geometric phantom for deformable image registration credentialing of radiotherapy centers for a clinical trial.

Authors:  Noriyuki Kadoya; Siwaporn Sakulsingharoj; Tomas Kron; Adam Yao; Nicholas Hardcastle; Alanah Bergman; Hiroyuki Okamoto; Nobutaka Mukumoto; Yujiro Nakajima; Keiichi Jingu; Mitsuhiro Nakamura
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-06-22       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Validation of a deformable MRI to CT registration algorithm employing same day planning MRI for surrogate analysis.

Authors:  Kyle R Padgett; Radka Stoyanova; Sara Pirozzi; Perry Johnson; Jon Piper; Nesrin Dogan; Alan Pollack
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2018-02-23       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  Performance variations among clinically available deformable image registration tools in adaptive radiotherapy - how should we evaluate and interpret the result?

Authors:  Ke Nie; Jean Pouliot; Eric Smith; Cynthia Chuang
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-03-08       Impact factor: 2.102

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.