Yue Zheng1,2, Pratik Samant3, Jack Merill2, Yong Chen4, Salahuddin Ahmad4, Dengwang Li1, Liangzhong Xiang2. 1. Shandong Key Laboratory of Medical Physics and Image Processing & Shandong Provincial Engineering and Technical Center of Light Manipulations, School of Physics and Electronics, Shandong Normal University, Jinan, 250358, China. 2. School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, 73019, USA. 3. School of Biomedical Engineering, University of Oklahoma, Norman, OK, 73019, USA. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, 73104, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to investigate the feasibility of x-ray-induced acoustic computed tomography (XACT) as an image guidance tool for tracking x-ray beam location and monitoring radiation dose delivered to the patient during stereotactic partial breast irradiation (SPBI). METHODS: An in-house simulation workflow was developed to assess the ability of XACT to act as an in vivo dosimetry tool for SPBI. To evaluate this simulation workflow, a three-dimensional (3D) digital breast phantom was created by a series of two-dimensional (2D) breast CT slices from a patient. Three different tissue types (skin, adipose tissue, and glandular tissue) were segmented and the postlumpectomy seroma was simulated inside the digital breast phantom. A treatment plan was made with three beam angles to deliver radiation dose to the seroma in breast to simulate SPBI. The three beam angles for 2D simulations were 17°, 90° and 159° (couch angles were 0 degrees) while the angles were 90 degrees (couch angles were 0°, 27°, 90°) in 3D simulation. A multi-step simulation platform capable of modelling XACT was developed. First, the dose distribution was converted to an initial pressure distribution. The propagation of this pressure disturbance in the form of induced acoustic waves was then modeled using the k-wave MATLAB toolbox. The waves were then detected by a hemispherical-shaped ultrasound transducer array (6320 transducer locations distributed on the surface of the breast). Finally, the time-varying pressure signals detected at each transducer location were used to reconstruct an image of the initial pressure distribution using a 3D time-reversal reconstruction algorithm. Finally, the reconstructed XACT images of the radiation beams were overlaid onto the structure breast CT. RESULTS: It was found that XACT was able to reconstruct the dose distribution of SPBI in 3D. In the reconstructed 3D volumetric dose distribution, the average doses in the GTV (Gross Target Volume) and PTV (Planning Target Volume) were 86.15% and 80.89%, respectively. When compared to the treatment plan, the XACT reconstructed dose distribution in the GTV and PTV had a RMSE (root mean square error) of 2.408 % and 2.299 % over all pixels. The 3D breast XACT imaging reconstruction with time-reversal reconstruction algorithm can be finished within several minutes. CONCLUSIONS: This work explores the feasibility of using the novel imaging modality of XACT as an in vivo dosimeter for SPBI radiotherapy. It shows that XACT imaging can provide the x-ray beam location and dose information in deep tissue during the treatment in real time in 3D. This study lays the groundwork for a variety of future studies related to the use of XACT as a dosimeter at different cancer sites.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to investigate the feasibility of x-ray-induced acoustic computed tomography (XACT) as an image guidance tool for tracking x-ray beam location and monitoring radiation dose delivered to the patient during stereotactic partial breast irradiation (SPBI). METHODS: An in-house simulation workflow was developed to assess the ability of XACT to act as an in vivo dosimetry tool for SPBI. To evaluate this simulation workflow, a three-dimensional (3D) digital breast phantom was created by a series of two-dimensional (2D) breast CT slices from a patient. Three different tissue types (skin, adipose tissue, and glandular tissue) were segmented and the postlumpectomy seroma was simulated inside the digital breast phantom. A treatment plan was made with three beam angles to deliver radiation dose to the seroma in breast to simulate SPBI. The three beam angles for 2D simulations were 17°, 90° and 159° (couch angles were 0 degrees) while the angles were 90 degrees (couch angles were 0°, 27°, 90°) in 3D simulation. A multi-step simulation platform capable of modelling XACT was developed. First, the dose distribution was converted to an initial pressure distribution. The propagation of this pressure disturbance in the form of induced acoustic waves was then modeled using the k-wave MATLAB toolbox. The waves were then detected by a hemispherical-shaped ultrasound transducer array (6320 transducer locations distributed on the surface of the breast). Finally, the time-varying pressure signals detected at each transducer location were used to reconstruct an image of the initial pressure distribution using a 3D time-reversal reconstruction algorithm. Finally, the reconstructed XACT images of the radiation beams were overlaid onto the structure breast CT. RESULTS: It was found that XACT was able to reconstruct the dose distribution of SPBI in 3D. In the reconstructed 3D volumetric dose distribution, the average doses in the GTV (Gross Target Volume) and PTV (Planning Target Volume) were 86.15% and 80.89%, respectively. When compared to the treatment plan, the XACT reconstructed dose distribution in the GTV and PTV had a RMSE (root mean square error) of 2.408 % and 2.299 % over all pixels. The 3D breast XACT imaging reconstruction with time-reversal reconstruction algorithm can be finished within several minutes. CONCLUSIONS: This work explores the feasibility of using the novel imaging modality of XACT as an in vivo dosimeter for SPBI radiotherapy. It shows that XACT imaging can provide the x-ray beam location and dose information in deep tissue during the treatment in real time in 3D. This study lays the groundwork for a variety of future studies related to the use of XACT as a dosimeter at different cancer sites.
Authors: Tsuicheng D Chiu; David Parsons; Yue Zhang; Brian Hrycushko; Bo Zhao; Rajiv Chopra; Nathan Kim; Ann Spangler; Asal Rahimi; Robert Timmerman; Steve B Jiang; Weiguo Lu; Xuejun Gu Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: James W Snider; Yildirim Mutaf; Elizabeth Nichols; Andrea Hall; Patrick Vadnais; William F Regine; Steven J Feigenberg Journal: Technol Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-07-14
Authors: Brian W Pogue; Rongxiao Zhang; Xu Cao; Jeremy Mengyu Jia; Arthur Petusseau; Petr Bruza; Sergei A Vinogradov Journal: J Biomed Opt Date: 2021-01 Impact factor: 3.170