Literature DB >> 27839589

Anatomical contouring variability in thoracic organs at risk.

Ross McCall1, Grayden MacLennan2, Matthew Taylor2, Nishele Lenards2, Benjamin E Nelms3, Matthew Koshy4, Jeffrey Lemons4, Ashley Hunzeker2.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to determine whether contouring thoracic organs at risk was consistent among medical dosimetrists and to identify how trends in dosimetrist׳s education and experience affected contouring accuracy. Qualitative and quantitative methods were used to contextualize the raw data that were obtained. A total of 3 different computed tomography (CT) data sets were provided to medical dosimetrists (N = 13) across 5 different institutions. The medical dosimetrists were directed to contour the lungs, heart, spinal cord, and esophagus. The medical dosimetrists were instructed to contour in line with their institutional standards and were allowed to use any contouring tool or technique that they would traditionally use. The contours from each medical dosimetrist were evaluated against "gold standard" contours drawn and validated by 2 radiation oncology physicians. The dosimetrist-derived contours were evaluated against the gold standard using both a Dice coefficient method and a penalty-based metric scoring system. A short survey was also completed by each medical dosimetrist to evaluate their individual contouring experience. There was no significant variation in the contouring consistency of the lungs and spinal cord. Intradosimetrist contouring was consistent for those who contoured the esophagus and heart correctly; however, medical dosimetrists with a poor metric score showed erratic and inconsistent methods of contouring.
Copyright © 2016 American Association of Medical Dosimetrists. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Contour variability; Contouring; Esophagus; Heart; Organs at risk; Spine; Thorax

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27839589     DOI: 10.1016/j.meddos.2016.08.004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Dosim        ISSN: 1873-4022            Impact factor:   1.482


  7 in total

Review 1.  Magnetic resonance imaging in precision radiation therapy for lung cancer.

Authors:  Hannah Bainbridge; Ahmed Salem; Rob H N Tijssen; Michael Dubec; Andreas Wetscherek; Corinne Van Es; Jose Belderbos; Corinne Faivre-Finn; Fiona McDonald
Journal:  Transl Lung Cancer Res       Date:  2017-12

2.  Initial experience with introducing national guidelines for CT- and MRI-based delineation of organs at risk in radiotherapy.

Authors:  Caroline Olsson; Tufve Nyholm; Elinore Wieslander; Eva Onjukka; Adalsteinn Gunnlaugsson; Johan Reizenstein; Stefan Johnsson; Ingrid Kristensen; Johan Skönevik; Magnus Karlsson; Ulf Isacsson; Anna Flejmer; Edvard Abel; Fredrik Nordström; Leif Nyström; Kjell Bergfeldt; Björn Zackrisson; Alexander Valdman
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-09-23

3.  Evaluation of Varian's SmartAdapt for clinical use in radiation therapy for patients with thoracic lesions.

Authors:  Jason Vickress; Maria Alejandra Rangel Baltazar; Hossein Afsharpour
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 2.102

4.  Prospective Clinical Evaluation of Integrating a Radiation Anatomist for Contouring in Routine Radiation Treatment Planning.

Authors:  Helen Zhang; Ifeanyirochukwu Onochie; Lara Hilal; N Ari Wijetunga; Elizabeth Hipp; David M Guttmann; Oren Cahlon; Charles Washington; Daniel R Gomez; Erin F Gillespie
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2022-07-29

5.  Evaluation of Image Registration Accuracy for Tumor and Organs at Risk in the Thorax for Compliance With TG 132 Recommendations.

Authors:  Christopher L Guy; Elisabeth Weiss; Shaomin Che; Nuzhat Jan; Sherry Zhao; Mihaela Rosu-Bubulac
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2018-09-07

6.  Study on the Effect of 4D-CT Special Reconstruction Images for Evaluation of the Cardiac Structure Dose in Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Ming Su; Guanzhong Gong; Xiaoping Qiu; Ying Tong; Qian Li; Yong Yin
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 6.244

7.  Contrast enhanced oesophageal avoidance for stereotactic body radiotherapy: Barium vs. Gastrografin.

Authors:  Katrina Woodford; Vanessa Panettieri; Jeremy D Ruben; Sidney Davis; Esther Sim; Trieumy Tran Le; Sashendra Senthi
Journal:  Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol       Date:  2019-12-16
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.