Daniel A Low1, Dylan O'Connell1, Michael Lauria1, Bradley Stiehl1, Louise Naumann1, Percy Lee2, John Hegde1, Igor Barjaktarevic3, Jonathan Goldin4, Anand Santhanam1. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, USA. 3. Department of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA. 4. Department of Radiology, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To examine the use of multiple fast-helical free breathing computed tomography (FHFBCT) scans for ventilation measurement. METHODS: Ten patients were scanned 25 times in alternating directions using a FHFBCT protocol. Simultaneously, an abdominal pneumatic bellows was used as a real-time breathing surrogate. Regions-of-interest (ROIs) were selected from the upper right lungs of each patient for analysis. The ROIs were first registered using a published registration technique (pTV). A subsequent follow-up registration employed an objective function with two terms, a ventilation-adjusted Hounsfield Unit difference and a conservation-of-mass term labeled ΔΓ that denoted the difference between the deformation Jacobian and the tissue density ratio. The ventilations were calculated voxel-by-voxel as the slope of a first-order fit of the Jacobian as a function of the breathing amplitude. RESULTS: The ventilations of the 10 patients showed different patterns and magnitudes. The average ventilation calculated from the deformation vector fields (DVFs) of the pTV and secondary registration was nearly identical, but the standard deviation of the voxel-to-voxel differences was approximately 0.1. The mean of the 90th percentile values of ΔΓ was reduced from 0.153 to 0.079 between the pTV and secondary registration, implying first that the secondary registration improved the conservation-of-mass criterion by almost 50% and that on average the correspondence between the Jacobian and density ratios as demonstrated by ΔΓ was less than 0.1. This improvement occurred in spite of the average of the 90th percentile changes in the DVF magnitudes being only 0.58 mm. CONCLUSIONS: This work introduces the use of multiple free-breathing CT scans for free-breathing ventilation measurements. The approach has some benefits over the traditional use of 4-dimensional CT (4DCT) or breath-hold scans. The benefit over 4DCT is that FHFBCT does not have sorting artifacts. The benefits over breath-hold scans include the relatively small motion induced by quiet respiration versus deep-inspiration breath hold and the potential for characterizing dynamic breathing processes that disappear during breath hold.
PURPOSE: To examine the use of multiple fast-helical free breathing computed tomography (FHFBCT) scans for ventilation measurement. METHODS: Ten patients were scanned 25 times in alternating directions using a FHFBCT protocol. Simultaneously, an abdominal pneumatic bellows was used as a real-time breathing surrogate. Regions-of-interest (ROIs) were selected from the upper right lungs of each patient for analysis. The ROIs were first registered using a published registration technique (pTV). A subsequent follow-up registration employed an objective function with two terms, a ventilation-adjusted Hounsfield Unit difference and a conservation-of-mass term labeled ΔΓ that denoted the difference between the deformation Jacobian and the tissue density ratio. The ventilations were calculated voxel-by-voxel as the slope of a first-order fit of the Jacobian as a function of the breathing amplitude. RESULTS: The ventilations of the 10 patients showed different patterns and magnitudes. The average ventilation calculated from the deformation vector fields (DVFs) of the pTV and secondary registration was nearly identical, but the standard deviation of the voxel-to-voxel differences was approximately 0.1. The mean of the 90th percentile values of ΔΓ was reduced from 0.153 to 0.079 between the pTV and secondary registration, implying first that the secondary registration improved the conservation-of-mass criterion by almost 50% and that on average the correspondence between the Jacobian and density ratios as demonstrated by ΔΓ was less than 0.1. This improvement occurred in spite of the average of the 90th percentile changes in the DVF magnitudes being only 0.58 mm. CONCLUSIONS: This work introduces the use of multiple free-breathing CT scans for free-breathing ventilation measurements. The approach has some benefits over the traditional use of 4-dimensional CT (4DCT) or breath-hold scans. The benefit over 4DCT is that FHFBCT does not have sorting artifacts. The benefits over breath-hold scans include the relatively small motion induced by quiet respiration versus deep-inspiration breath hold and the potential for characterizing dynamic breathing processes that disappear during breath hold.
Authors: John Kipritidis; Bilal A Tahir; Guillaume Cazoulat; Michael S Hofman; Shankar Siva; Jason Callahan; Nicholas Hardcastle; Tokihiro Yamamoto; Gary E Christensen; Joseph M Reinhardt; Noriyuki Kadoya; Taylor J Patton; Sarah E Gerard; Isabella Duarte; Ben Archibald-Heeren; Mikel Byrne; Rick Sims; Scott Ramsay; Jeremy T Booth; Enid Eslick; Fiona Hegi-Johnson; Henry C Woodruff; Rob H Ireland; Jim M Wild; Jing Cai; John E Bayouth; Kristy Brock; Paul J Keall Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Joseph M Reinhardt; Kai Ding; Kunlin Cao; Gary E Christensen; Eric A Hoffman; Shalmali V Bodas Journal: Med Image Anal Date: 2008-04-12 Impact factor: 8.545
Authors: Dylan O'Connell; David H Thomas; John H Lewis; Katelyn Hasse; Anand Santhanam; James M Lamb; Minsong Cao; Stephen Tenn; Nzhde Agazaryan; Percy P Lee; Daniel A Low Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-02-18 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Daniel A Low; Parag J Parikh; Wei Lu; James F Dempsey; Sasha H Wahab; James P Hubenschmidt; Michelle M Nystrom; Maureen Handoko; Jeffrey D Bradley Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2005-11-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: David H Thomas; Jun Tan; Jack Neylon; Tai Dou; Dylan O'Connell; Michael McNitt-Gray; Percy Lee; James Lamb; Daniel A Low Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2017-11-21 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Tai H Dou; David H Thomas; Dylan P O'Connell; James M Lamb; Percy Lee; Daniel A Low Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2015-08-07 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Edward Castillo; Richard Castillo; Yevgeniy Vinogradskiy; Michele Dougherty; David Solis; Nicholas Myziuk; Andrew Thompson; Rudy Guerra; Girish Nair; Thomas Guerrero Journal: Med Phys Date: 2019-03-22 Impact factor: 4.071