Literature DB >> 28444772

Multiatlas approach with local registration goodness weighting for MRI-based electron density mapping of head and neck anatomy.

Reza Farjam1, Neelam Tyagi1, Harini Veeraraghavan1, Aditya Apte1, Kristen Zakian1, Margie A Hunt1, Joseph O Deasy1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The growing use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a substitute for computed tomography-based treatment planning requires the development of effective algorithms to generate electron density maps for treatment planning and patient setup verification. The purpose of this work was to develop a method to synthesize computerized tomography (CT) for MR-only radiotherapy of head and neck cancer patients.
METHODS: The algorithm is based on registration of multiple patient datasets containing both MRI and CT images (a "multiatlas" algorithm). Twelve matched pairs of good quality CT and MRI scans (those without apparent motion and blurring artifacts) were selected from a pool of head and neck cancer patients to form the atlas. All atlas MRI scans were preprocessed to reduce scanner- and patient-induced intensity inhomogeneities and to standardize their intensity histograms. Atlas CT and MRIs were coregistered using a novel bone-to-air replacement technique applied to the CT scans that improves the similarity between CTs and MRIs and facilitates the registration process. For each new patient, all atlas MRIs are deformed initially onto the new patients' MRI. We introduce a generalized registration error (GRE) metric that automatically measures the goodness of local registration between MRI pairs. The final synthetic CT value at each point is a nonlinear GRE-weighted average of the atlas CTs. For evaluation, the leave-one-out technique was used for synthetic CT generation and the mean absolute error (MAE) between the original and synthetic CT was computed over the entire CT image. The impact of our proposed CT-MR registration scheme on the accuracy of the final synthetic CT was also studied. The original treatment plans were also recomputed on the new synthetic CTs and dose-volume histogram metrics were compared. In addition, the two-dimensional (2D) gamma analysis at 1%/1 mm and 2%/2 mm dose difference/distance to agreement was also performed to study the dose distribution at the isocenter.
RESULTS: MAE error (± standard deviation) between the original and the synthetic CTs was 64 ± 10, 113 ± 12, and 130 ± 28 Hounsfield Unit (HU) for the entire image, air, and bone regions respectively. Our results showed that our proposed bone-suppression based CT-MR fusion and GRE-weighted strategy could lower the overall MAE error between the original and synthetic CTs by ~69% and ~34% respectively. Dose recalculation comparison showed highly consistent results between plans based on the synthetic vs. the original CTs. The 2D gamma analysis revealed the pass rate of 95.44 ± 2.5 and 99.36 ± 0.71 for 1%/1 mm and 2%/2 mm criteria respectively. Due to local registration weighting, the method is robust with respect to MRI imaging artifacts.
CONCLUSION: We developed a novel image analysis technique to synthesize CT for head and neck anatomy. Novel methods were introduced to accurately register atlas CTs and MRIs as well as to weight the final electron density maps using local registration goodness estimates. The resulting accuracy is clinically acceptable, at least for these atlas patients.
© 2017 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bone suppression CT; generalized registration error; synthetic CT

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28444772      PMCID: PMC5510622          DOI: 10.1002/mp.12303

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


  30 in total

1.  Magnetic Resonance-Based Automatic Air Segmentation for Generation of Synthetic Computed Tomography Scans in the Head Region.

Authors:  Weili Zheng; Joshua P Kim; Mo Kadbi; Benjamin Movsas; Indrin J Chetty; Carri K Glide-Hurst
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 7.038

2.  MRI distortion: considerations for MRI based radiotherapy treatment planning.

Authors:  Amy Walker; Gary Liney; Peter Metcalfe; Lois Holloway
Journal:  Australas Phys Eng Sci Med       Date:  2014-02-12       Impact factor: 1.430

3.  MRI-based treatment planning with pseudo CT generated through atlas registration.

Authors:  Jinsoo Uh; Thomas E Merchant; Yimei Li; Xingyu Li; Chiaho Hua
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  New variants of a method of MRI scale standardization.

Authors:  L G Nyúl; J K Udupa; X Zhang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 10.048

5.  A unifying probabilistic Bayesian approach to derive electron density from MRI for radiation therapy treatment planning.

Authors:  Madhu Sudhan Reddy Gudur; Wendy Hara; Quynh-Thu Le; Lei Wang; Lei Xing; Ruijiang Li
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2014-10-16       Impact factor: 3.609

6.  SEMAC: Slice Encoding for Metal Artifact Correction in MRI.

Authors:  Wenmiao Lu; Kim Butts Pauly; Garry E Gold; John M Pauly; Brian A Hargreaves
Journal:  Magn Reson Med       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 4.668

7.  Effects of geometric distortion in 0.2T MRI on radiotherapy treatment planning of prostate cancer.

Authors:  Bernhard Petersch; Joachim Bogner; Annette Fransson; Thomas Lorang; Richard Pötter
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 6.280

8.  Patient-induced susceptibility effect on geometric distortion of clinical brain MRI for radiation treatment planning on a 3T scanner.

Authors:  H Wang; J Balter; Y Cao
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2013-01-10       Impact factor: 3.609

9.  Automatic Substitute Computed Tomography Generation and Contouring for Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)-Alone External Beam Radiation Therapy From Standard MRI Sequences.

Authors:  Jason A Dowling; Jidi Sun; Peter Pichler; David Rivest-Hénault; Soumya Ghose; Haylea Richardson; Chris Wratten; Jarad Martin; Jameen Arm; Leah Best; Shekhar S Chandra; Jurgen Fripp; Frederick W Menk; Peter B Greer
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2015-09-05       Impact factor: 7.038

10.  Tissue-based MRI intensity standardization: application to multicentric datasets.

Authors:  Nicolas Robitaille; Abderazzak Mouiha; Burt Crépeault; Fernando Valdivia; Simon Duchesne
Journal:  Int J Biomed Imaging       Date:  2012-05-03
View more
  11 in total

Review 1.  Emerging role of MRI in radiation therapy.

Authors:  Hersh Chandarana; Hesheng Wang; R H N Tijssen; Indra J Das
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2018-09-08       Impact factor: 4.813

2.  Patch-based generative adversarial neural network models for head and neck MR-only planning.

Authors:  Peter Klages; Ilyes Benslimane; Sadegh Riyahi; Jue Jiang; Margie Hunt; Joseph O Deasy; Harini Veeraraghavan; Neelam Tyagi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-12-25       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 3.  MRI-only treatment planning: benefits and challenges.

Authors:  Amir M Owrangi; Peter B Greer; Carri K Glide-Hurst
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Dynamic multiatlas selection-based consensus segmentation of head and neck structures from CT images.

Authors:  Rabia Haq; Sean L Berry; Joseph O Deasy; Margie Hunt; Harini Veeraraghavan
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-10-31       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  Dosimetric evaluation of synthetic CT generated with GANs for MRI-only proton therapy treatment planning of brain tumors.

Authors:  Samaneh Kazemifar; Ana M Barragán Montero; Kevin Souris; Sara T Rivas; Robert Timmerman; Yang K Park; Steve Jiang; Xavier Geets; Edmond Sterpin; Amir Owrangi
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2020-03-26       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Emergence of Radiomics: Novel Methodology Identifying Imaging Biomarkers of Disease in Diagnosis, Response, and Progression.

Authors:  Edward Florez; Ali Fatemi; Pier Paolo Claudio; Candace M Howard
Journal:  SM J Clin Med Imaging       Date:  2018-03-15

7.  An automated A-value measurement tool for accurate cochlear duct length estimation.

Authors:  John E Iyaniwura; Mai Elfarnawany; Hanif M Ladak; Sumit K Agrawal
Journal:  J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2018-01-22

8.  Synthetic computed tomography data allows for accurate absorbed dose calculations in a magnetic resonance imaging only workflow for head and neck radiotherapy.

Authors:  Emilia Palmér; Anna Karlsson; Fredrik Nordström; Karin Petruson; Carl Siversson; Maria Ljungberg; Maja Sohlin
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-01-11

9.  Robustness and Generalizability of Deep Learning Synthetic Computed Tomography for Positron Emission Tomography/Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Radiation Therapy Planning of Patients With Head and Neck Cancer.

Authors:  Anders B Olin; Christopher Thomas; Adam E Hansen; Jacob H Rasmussen; Georgios Krokos; Teresa Guerrero Urbano; Andriana Michaelidou; Björn Jakoby; Claes N Ladefoged; Anne K Berthelsen; Katrin Håkansson; Ivan R Vogelius; Lena Specht; Sally F Barrington; Flemming L Andersen; Barbara M Fischer
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2021-07-26

10.  Correction for Magnetic Field Inhomogeneities and Normalization of Voxel Values Are Needed to Better Reveal the Potential of MR Radiomic Features in Lung Cancer.

Authors:  Maxime Lacroix; Frédérique Frouin; Anne-Sophie Dirand; Christophe Nioche; Fanny Orlhac; Jean-François Bernaudin; Pierre-Yves Brillet; Irène Buvat
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2020-01-31       Impact factor: 6.244

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.