Literature DB >> 31209426

[Quantitative evaluation of image quality of megavoltage computed tomography for guiding helical tomotherapy].

Y L Huang1, C G Li1, K Mao2, J A Wu2, T T Dai2, Y Y Han2, H Wu1, H Y Wang1, Y B Zhang1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To quantitatively analyze image quality of two sets of phantom (CatPhan504 and Cheese) Megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT) images acquired by Helical Tomotherapy with three scanning modes (Fine, Normal and Coarse), and to explore and validate a semi-automatic quality assurance procedure for MVCT images of Helical Tomotherapy.
METHODS: On Helical Tomotherapy, CatPan504 and Cheese phantoms were scanned with three pitch levels (Fine, Normal, Coarse: 4 mm, 8 mm, 12 mm/circle) respectively. Pylinac, Matlab and Eclipse were used to calculate and compare spatial resolution, noise level and low contrast resolution of images obtained under three scanning modes respectively. The spatial resolution can be evaluated by the blurring of line-pair CT value in the images of CatPhan504's CTP528 module. The noise level can be evaluated by the integral non-uniformity in the images of Cheese's uniformity module. the low contrast resolution can be evaluated by contrast-to-noise ratio of both phantoms' plug-in module, or visibility of the region of interest (Supra-Slice) in the images of CatPhan504's CTP515 module.
RESULTS: Analyses on CatPhan504's line pair module(CTP528 module) showed that the first three line pairs(the gap size are 0.500 cm, 0.250 cm and 0.167 cm respectively) could be clearly observed but blurring began to occur from the fourth line pair(the gap size is 0.125 cm) under Coarse mode. Meanwhile, the first four line pairs were all observable under the Normal and Fine modes. Integral non-integrity index(the value negatively correlated with the noise level) were 0.155 7, 0.136 8 and 0.122 9 for Coarse, Normal and Fine modes respectively. None of the Supra-Slice in CatPhan504's CTP515 module could be observed under three imaging modes. Low contrast contrast-to-noise ratio of Cheese phantom was similar under three modes and the insert visibility exhibited nearly linear growth with the increasing difference between CT average value of the insert material and background.
CONCLUSION: Superiority and inferiority of three image modes in terms of the three image quality index was not consistent. Evaluation results above could provide reference for more rational decision on scanning modes selection of helical tomotherapy, which was based on image visualization demands in clinical practice. The proposed method could also provide guidance for similar image quality assessment and periodic quality assurance.

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31209426      PMCID: PMC7439036          DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2019.03.022

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Beijing Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban        ISSN: 1671-167X


  8 in total

1.  QA for helical tomotherapy: report of the AAPM Task Group 148.

Authors:  Katja M Langen; Niko Papanikolaou; John Balog; Richard Crilly; David Followill; S Murty Goddu; Walter Grant; Gustavo Olivera; Chester R Ramsey; Chengyu Shi
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Evaluation of radiation dose and image quality for the Varian cone beam computed tomography system.

Authors:  Harry C Y Cheng; Vincent W C Wu; Eva S F Liu; Dora L W Kwong
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2011-05-01       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  Performance characterization of megavoltage computed tomography imaging on a helical tomotherapy unit.

Authors:  Sanford L Meeks; Joseph F Harmon; Katja M Langen; Twyla R Willoughby; Thomas H Wagner; Patrick A Kupelian
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators.

Authors:  Eric E Klein; Joseph Hanley; John Bayouth; Fang-Fang Yin; William Simon; Sean Dresser; Christopher Serago; Francisco Aguirre; Lijun Ma; Bijan Arjomandy; Chihray Liu; Carlos Sandin; Todd Holmes
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-09       Impact factor: 4.071

5.  How to measure CT image quality: variations in CT-numbers, uniformity and low contrast resolution for a CT quality assurance phantom.

Authors:  Kristine Gulliksrud; Caroline Stokke; Anne Catrine Trægde Martinsen
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2014-02-13       Impact factor: 2.685

6.  Characterisation of rectal motion during neo-adjuvant radiochemotherapy for rectal cancer with image-guided tomotherapy: implications for adaptive dose escalation strategies.

Authors:  Eleonora Maggiulli; Claudio Fiorino; Paolo Passoni; Sara Broggi; Stefano Gianolini; Cristina Salvetti; Najla Slim; Nadia G Di Muzio; Riccardo Calandrino
Journal:  Acta Oncol       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 4.089

Review 7.  Less is more: Patient-level meta-analysis reveals paradoxical dose-response effects of a computer-based social anxiety intervention targeting attentional bias.

Authors:  Rebecca B Price; Jennie M Kuckertz; Nader Amir; Yair Bar-Haim; Per Carlbring; Meredith L Wallace
Journal:  Depress Anxiety       Date:  2017-04-28       Impact factor: 6.505

Review 8.  Image quality in CT: From physical measurements to model observers.

Authors:  F R Verdun; D Racine; J G Ott; M J Tapiovaara; P Toroi; F O Bochud; W J H Veldkamp; A Schegerer; R W Bouwman; I Hernandez Giron; N W Marshall; S Edyvean
Journal:  Phys Med       Date:  2015-10-12       Impact factor: 2.685

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.