PURPOSE: Combined kV-MV cone-beam CT (CBCT) is a promising approach to accelerate imaging for patients with lung tumors treated with deep inspiration breath-hold. During a single breath-hold (15 s), a 3D kV-MV CBCT can be acquired, thus minimizing motion artifacts and increasing patient comfort. Prior to clinical implementation, positioning accuracy was evaluated and compared to clinically established imaging techniques. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An inhomogeneous thorax phantom with four tumor-mimicking inlays was imaged in 10 predefined positions and registered to a planning CT. Novel kV-MV CBCT imaging (90° arc) was compared to clinically established kV-chest CBCT (360°) as well as nonclinical kV-CBCT and low-dose MV-CBCT (each 180°). Manual registration, automatic registration provided by the manufacturer and an additional in-house developed manufacturer-independent framework based on the MATLAB registration toolkit were applied. RESULTS: Systematic setup error was reduced to 0.05 mm by high-precision phantom positioning with optical tracking. Stochastic mean displacement errors were 0.5 ± 0.3 mm in right-left, 0.4 ± 0.4 mm in anteroposterior and 0.0 ± 0.4 mm in craniocaudal directions for kV-MV CBCT with manual registration (maximum errors of no more than 1.4 mm). Clinical kV-chest CBCT resulted in mean errors of 0.2 mm (other modalities: 0.4-0.8 mm). Similar results were achieved with both automatic registration methods. CONCLUSION: The comparison study of repositioning accuracy between novel kV-MV CBCT and clinically established volume imaging demonstrated that registration accuracy is maintained below 1 mm. Since imaging time is reduced to one breath-hold, kV-MV CBCT is ideal for image guidance, e.g., in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy.
PURPOSE: Combined kV-MV cone-beam CT (CBCT) is a promising approach to accelerate imaging for patients with lung tumors treated with deep inspiration breath-hold. During a single breath-hold (15 s), a 3D kV-MV CBCT can be acquired, thus minimizing motion artifacts and increasing patient comfort. Prior to clinical implementation, positioning accuracy was evaluated and compared to clinically established imaging techniques. METHODS AND MATERIALS: An inhomogeneous thorax phantom with four tumor-mimicking inlays was imaged in 10 predefined positions and registered to a planning CT. Novel kV-MV CBCT imaging (90° arc) was compared to clinically established kV-chest CBCT (360°) as well as nonclinical kV-CBCT and low-dose MV-CBCT (each 180°). Manual registration, automatic registration provided by the manufacturer and an additional in-house developed manufacturer-independent framework based on the MATLAB registration toolkit were applied. RESULTS: Systematic setup error was reduced to 0.05 mm by high-precision phantom positioning with optical tracking. Stochastic mean displacement errors were 0.5 ± 0.3 mm in right-left, 0.4 ± 0.4 mm in anteroposterior and 0.0 ± 0.4 mm in craniocaudal directions for kV-MV CBCT with manual registration (maximum errors of no more than 1.4 mm). Clinical kV-chest CBCT resulted in mean errors of 0.2 mm (other modalities: 0.4-0.8 mm). Similar results were achieved with both automatic registration methods. CONCLUSION: The comparison study of repositioning accuracy between novel kV-MV CBCT and clinically established volume imaging demonstrated that registration accuracy is maintained below 1 mm. Since imaging time is reduced to one breath-hold, kV-MV CBCT is ideal for image guidance, e.g., in lung stereotactic ablative radiotherapy.
Authors: J W Wong; M B Sharpe; D A Jaffray; V R Kini; J M Robertson; J S Stromberg; A A Martinez Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1999-07-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Tianfang Li; Lei Xing; Peter Munro; Christopher McGuinness; Ming Chao; Yong Yang; Bill Loo; Albert Koong Journal: Med Phys Date: 2006-10 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Judit Boda-Heggemann; Antje-Christin Knopf; Anna Simeonova-Chergou; Hansjörg Wertz; Florian Stieler; Anika Jahnke; Lennart Jahnke; Jens Fleckenstein; Lena Vogel; Anna Arns; Manuel Blessing; Frederik Wenz; Frank Lohr Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Manuel Blessing; Dzmitry Stsepankou; Hansjoerg Wertz; Anna Arns; Frank Lohr; Jürgen Hesser; Frederik Wenz Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2010-05-28 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Rojano Kashani; Rojano Koshani; James M Balter; James A Hayman; George T Henning; Marcel van Herk Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2006-08-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Matthias Guckenberger; Thomas Krieger; Anne Richter; Kurt Baier; Juergen Wilbert; Reinhart A Sweeney; Michael Flentje Journal: Radiother Oncol Date: 2008-10-04 Impact factor: 6.280