OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to present an outcome validation tool for tumor radiofrequency (RF) ablation and resection. METHODS: Intervention assessment tools require an accurate registration of both pre- and postoperative computed tomographies able to handle big deformations. Therefore, a physics-based method is proposed with that purpose. To increase the accuracy both automatically detected internal and surface physical landmarks are incorporated in the registration process. RESULTS: The algorithm has been evaluated in 25 clinical datasets containing RF ablations, resections, and patients with recurrent tumors. The achieved accuracy is 1.2 mm measured as mean internal distance between vessel landmarks and a positive predictive value of 0.95. The quantitative and qualitative results of the outcome validation tool show that in 50% of the cases tumors were only partially covered by the treatment. CONCLUSION: The use of internal and surface landmarks combined with a physics-based registration method increases the accuracy of the results compared to the accuracy of state of the art methods. An accurate outcome validation tool is important in order to certify that the tumor and its safety margin were fully covered by the treatment. SIGNIFICANCE: An accurate outcome validation tool can result in a decrease of the tumor recurrence rate.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this paper is to present an outcome validation tool for tumor radiofrequency (RF) ablation and resection. METHODS: Intervention assessment tools require an accurate registration of both pre- and postoperative computed tomographies able to handle big deformations. Therefore, a physics-based method is proposed with that purpose. To increase the accuracy both automatically detected internal and surface physical landmarks are incorporated in the registration process. RESULTS: The algorithm has been evaluated in 25 clinical datasets containing RF ablations, resections, and patients with recurrent tumors. The achieved accuracy is 1.2 mm measured as mean internal distance between vessel landmarks and a positive predictive value of 0.95. The quantitative and qualitative results of the outcome validation tool show that in 50% of the cases tumors were only partially covered by the treatment. CONCLUSION: The use of internal and surface landmarks combined with a physics-based registration method increases the accuracy of the results compared to the accuracy of state of the art methods. An accurate outcome validation tool is important in order to certify that the tumor and its safety margin were fully covered by the treatment. SIGNIFICANCE: An accurate outcome validation tool can result in a decrease of the tumor recurrence rate.
Authors: Louisa Hempel; Constantin Lapa; Alexander Dierks; Andreas Gaumann; Josef Scheiber; Julia Veloso de Oliveira; Patrick Philipp; Cristina Oyarzun Laura; Stefan Wesarg; Sebastian Robert; Dirk Hempel Journal: Ther Adv Med Oncol Date: 2022-09-26 Impact factor: 5.485