PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to evaluate the various computed tomography (CT) techniques such as fast CT, slow CT, breath-hold (BH) CT, full-fan cone beam CT (FF-CBCT), half-fan CBCT (HF-CBCT), and average CT for delineation of internal target volume (ITV). In addition, these ITVs were compared against four-dimensional CT (4DCT) ITVs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three-dimensional target motion was simulated using dynamic thorax phantom with target insert of diameter 3 cm for ten respiration data. CT images were acquired using a commercially available multislice CT scanner, and the CBCT images were acquired using On-Board-Imager. Average CT was generated by averaging 10 phases of 4DCT. ITVs were delineated for each CT by contouring the volume of the target ball; 4DCT ITVs were generated by merging all 10 phases target volumes. Incase of BH-CT, ITV was derived by boolean of CT phases 0%, 50%, and fast CT target volumes. RESULTS: ITVs determined by all CT and CBCT scans were significantly smaller (P < 0.05) than the 4DCT ITV, whereas there was no significant difference between average CT and 4DCT ITVs (P = 0.17). Fast CT had the maximum deviation (-46.1% ± 20.9%) followed by slow CT (-34.3% ± 11.0%) and FF-CBCT scans (-26.3% ± 8.7%). However, HF-CBCT scans (-12.9% ± 4.4%) and BH-CT scans (-11.1% ± 8.5%) resulted in almost similar deviation. On the contrary, average CT had the least deviation (-4.7% ± 9.8%). CONCLUSIONS: When comparing with 4DCT, all the CT techniques underestimated ITV. In the absence of 4DCT, the HF-CBCT target volumes with appropriate margin may be a reasonable approach for defining the ITV.
PURPOSE: The aim of this work was to evaluate the various computed tomography (CT) techniques such as fast CT, slow CT, breath-hold (BH) CT, full-fan cone beam CT (FF-CBCT), half-fan CBCT (HF-CBCT), and average CT for delineation of internal target volume (ITV). In addition, these ITVs were compared against four-dimensional CT (4DCT) ITVs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three-dimensional target motion was simulated using dynamic thorax phantom with target insert of diameter 3 cm for ten respiration data. CT images were acquired using a commercially available multislice CT scanner, and the CBCT images were acquired using On-Board-Imager. Average CT was generated by averaging 10 phases of 4DCT. ITVs were delineated for each CT by contouring the volume of the target ball; 4DCT ITVs were generated by merging all 10 phases target volumes. Incase of BH-CT, ITV was derived by boolean of CT phases 0%, 50%, and fast CT target volumes. RESULTS: ITVs determined by all CT and CBCT scans were significantly smaller (P < 0.05) than the 4DCT ITV, whereas there was no significant difference between average CT and 4DCT ITVs (P = 0.17). Fast CT had the maximum deviation (-46.1% ± 20.9%) followed by slow CT (-34.3% ± 11.0%) and FF-CBCT scans (-26.3% ± 8.7%). However, HF-CBCT scans (-12.9% ± 4.4%) and BH-CT scans (-11.1% ± 8.5%) resulted in almost similar deviation. On the contrary, average CT had the least deviation (-4.7% ± 9.8%). CONCLUSIONS: When comparing with 4DCT, all the CT techniques underestimated ITV. In the absence of 4DCT, the HF-CBCT target volumes with appropriate margin may be a reasonable approach for defining the ITV.