BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was dosimetric effect quantification of exclusive computed tomography (CT) use with an intravenous (IV) contrast agent (CA ), on dose distribution of 3D-CRT treatment plans for lung cancer. Furthermore, dosimetric advantage investigation of manually contrast-enhanced region overriding, especially the heart. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten patients with lung cancer were considered. For each patient two planning CT sets were initially taken with and without CA. Treatment planning were optimized based on CT scans without CA. All plans were copied and recomputed on scans with CA. In addition, scans with IV contrast were copied and density correction was performed for heart contrast enhanced. Same plans were copied and replaced to undo dose calculation errors that may be caused by CA. Eventually, dosimetric evaluations based on dose volume histograms (DVHs) of planning target volumes (PTV) and organs at-risk were studied and analyzed using the Wilcoxon's signed rank test. RESULTS: There is no statistically significant difference in dose calculation for the PTV maximum, mean, minimum doses, spinal cord maximum doses and lung volumes that received 20 and 30 Gy, between planes calculated with and without contrast scans (p > 0.05) and also for contrast scan, with manual regions overriding. CONCLUSIONS: Dose difference caused by the contrast agent is negligible and not significant. Therefore, there is no justification to perform two scans, and using an IV contrast enhanced scan for dose calculation is sufficient.
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was dosimetric effect quantification of exclusive computed tomography (CT) use with an intravenous (IV) contrast agent (CA ), on dose distribution of 3D-CRT treatment plans for lung cancer. Furthermore, dosimetric advantage investigation of manually contrast-enhanced region overriding, especially the heart. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Ten patients with lung cancer were considered. For each patient two planning CT sets were initially taken with and without CA. Treatment planning were optimized based on CT scans without CA. All plans were copied and recomputed on scans with CA. In addition, scans with IV contrast were copied and density correction was performed for heart contrast enhanced. Same plans were copied and replaced to undo dose calculation errors that may be caused by CA. Eventually, dosimetric evaluations based on dose volume histograms (DVHs) of planning target volumes (PTV) and organs at-risk were studied and analyzed using the Wilcoxon's signed rank test. RESULTS: There is no statistically significant difference in dose calculation for the PTV maximum, mean, minimum doses, spinal cord maximum doses and lung volumes that received 20 and 30 Gy, between planes calculated with and without contrast scans (p > 0.05) and also for contrast scan, with manual regions overriding. CONCLUSIONS: Dose difference caused by the contrast agent is negligible and not significant. Therefore, there is no justification to perform two scans, and using an IV contrast enhanced scan for dose calculation is sufficient.
Authors: P N Cascade; B H Gross; E A Kazerooni; L E Quint; I R Francis; M Strawderman; M Korobkin Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 1998-04 Impact factor: 3.959