INTRODUCTION: Deformable image registration (DIR) is a required tool in any adaptive radiotherapy program to help account for anatomical changes that occur during a multifraction treatment. SmartAdapt is a DIR tool from Varian incorporated within the eclipse treatment planning system, that can be used for contour propagation and transfer of PET, MRI, or computed tomography (CT) data. The purpose of this work is to evaluate the registration and contour propagation accuracy of SmartAdapt for thoracic CT studies using the guidelines from AAPM TG 132. METHODS: To evaluate the registration accuracy of SmartAdapt the mean target registration error (TRE) was measured for ten landmarked 4DCT images from the https://www.dir-labs.com/ which included 300 landmarks matching the inspiration and expiration phase images. To further characterize the registration accuracy, the magnitude of deformation for each 4DCT was measured and compared against the mean TRE for each study. Contour propagation accuracy was evaluated using 22 randomly selected lung cancer cases from our center where there was either a replan, or the patient was treated for a new lesion within the lung. Contours evaluated included the right and left lung, esophagus, spinal canal, heart and the GTV and the results were quantified using the DICE similarity coefficient. RESULTS: The mean TRE from all ten cases was 1.89 mm, the maximum mean TRE per case was 3.8 mm from case #8, which also had the most landmark pairs with displacements >2 cm. For contour propagation accuracy, the DICE coefficient results for left lung, right lung, heart, esophagus, and spinal canal were 0.93, 0.94, 0.90, 0.61, and 0.82 respectively. CONCLUSION: The results from our study demonstrate that for thoracic images SmartAdapt in most cases will be accurate to below 2 mm in registration error unless there is deformation greater than 2 cm.
INTRODUCTION: Deformable image registration (DIR) is a required tool in any adaptive radiotherapy program to help account for anatomical changes that occur during a multifraction treatment. SmartAdapt is a DIR tool from Varian incorporated within the eclipse treatment planning system, that can be used for contour propagation and transfer of PET, MRI, or computed tomography (CT) data. The purpose of this work is to evaluate the registration and contour propagation accuracy of SmartAdapt for thoracic CT studies using the guidelines from AAPM TG 132. METHODS: To evaluate the registration accuracy of SmartAdapt the mean target registration error (TRE) was measured for ten landmarked 4DCT images from the https://www.dir-labs.com/ which included 300 landmarks matching the inspiration and expiration phase images. To further characterize the registration accuracy, the magnitude of deformation for each 4DCT was measured and compared against the mean TRE for each study. Contour propagation accuracy was evaluated using 22 randomly selected lung cancer cases from our center where there was either a replan, or the patient was treated for a new lesion within the lung. Contours evaluated included the right and left lung, esophagus, spinal canal, heart and the GTV and the results were quantified using the DICE similarity coefficient. RESULTS: The mean TRE from all ten cases was 1.89 mm, the maximum mean TRE per case was 3.8 mm from case #8, which also had the most landmark pairs with displacements >2 cm. For contour propagation accuracy, the DICE coefficient results for left lung, right lung, heart, esophagus, and spinal canal were 0.93, 0.94, 0.90, 0.61, and 0.82 respectively. CONCLUSION: The results from our study demonstrate that for thoracic images SmartAdapt in most cases will be accurate to below 2 mm in registration error unless there is deformation greater than 2 cm.
Authors: Ross McCall; Grayden MacLennan; Matthew Taylor; Nishele Lenards; Benjamin E Nelms; Matthew Koshy; Jeffrey Lemons; Ashley Hunzeker Journal: Med Dosim Date: 2016 Winter Impact factor: 1.482
Authors: M A Deeley; A Chen; R Datteri; J H Noble; A J Cmelak; E F Donnelly; A W Malcolm; L Moretti; J Jaboin; K Niermann; Eddy S Yang; David S Yu; F Yei; T Koyama; G X Ding; B M Dawant Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2011-07-01 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: Edward Castillo; Richard Castillo; Josue Martinez; Maithili Shenoy; Thomas Guerrero Journal: Phys Med Biol Date: 2010-01-07 Impact factor: 3.609
Authors: G F Persson; D E Nygaard; C Hollensen; P Munck af Rosenschöld; L S Mouritsen; A K Due; A K Berthelsen; J Nyman; E Markova; A P Roed; H Roed; S Korreman; L Specht Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2012-09 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Ihab S Ramadaan; Karsten Peick; David A Hamilton; Jamie Evans; Douglas Iupati; Anna Nicholson; Lynne Greig; Robert J W Louwe Journal: Radiat Oncol Date: 2015-03-31 Impact factor: 3.481