Comparison of different registration methods in cone-beam computed tomography for breast boost radiation therapy

被引:1
|
作者
Lastrucci, A. [1 ]
Fedeli, L. [2 ]
Marciello, L. [3 ]
Serventi, E. [1 ]
Segnini, S. [1 ]
Meucci, F. [2 ]
Bernardi, L. [2 ]
Ricci, R. [1 ]
Marzano, S. [3 ]
机构
[1] Santo Stefano Hosp, Dept Tech Hlth Profess, Radiat Oncol Unit, Azienda USL Toscana Ctr, I-59100 Prato, Italy
[2] Santo Stefano Hosp, Med Phys Unit, Azienda USL Toscana Ctr, I-59100 Prato Pistoia, Italy
[3] Santo Stefano Hosp, Dept Oncol, Radiat Oncol Unit, Azienda USL Toscana Ctr, I-59100 Prato, Italy
关键词
Boost; breast; CBCT; Clipbox; IGRT; Mask; CONSERVING THERAPY; CANCER; RADIOTHERAPY; ELECTRON;
D O I
10.1017/S1460396922000176
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Introduction: The aim of this study is to compare patient geometrical uncertainties in the treatment of breast boost three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT) considering both manual alignment and automatic different registration methods in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods: A total of 85 patients were chosen for this study. A total of 254 registrations of CBCT vs planning computed tomography (CT) were retrospectively performed using automatic registration algorithms from Elekta XVI system (Clipbox and Mask) to detect patient setup uncertainties. All CBCTs were also matched manually by three health professionals. Mean shift values obtained with manual registration performed by health professionals were used as reference. Absolute value of difference between automatic algorithm shifts and reference values shifts was collected for each enrolled patient considering the three different spatial directions (x, y ,z), and the magnitude was calculated (delta m for Mask and delta c for Clipbox). Results: Data analysis showed a significant difference in delta m and delta c. t-Test statistics showed a high difference between Mask and Clipbox, in particular mean delta m = (1.3 +/- 0.1) mm and delta c = (3.3 +/- 1.2) mm (p-value <0.0001). Mask algorithm was performed in a very similar way with respect to the reference alignment, and the differences between these two procedures were of the order of 1 mm. Clipbox algorithm showed larger differences with manual registration. Conclusions: These results suggest that the Mask algorithm may be the optimal choice for patient setup verification in clinical practice for breast boost treatment in 3D-CRT.
引用
收藏
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Evaluation of 4-dimensional Computed Tomography to 4-dimensional Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Deformable Image Registration for Lung Cancer Adaptive Radiation Therapy
    Balik, Salim
    Weiss, Elisabeth
    Jan, Nuzhat
    Roman, Nicholas
    Sleeman, William C.
    Fatyga, Mirek
    Christensen, Gary E.
    Zhang, Cheng
    Murphy, Martin J.
    Lu, Jun
    Keall, Paul
    Williamson, Jeffrey F.
    Hugo, Geoffrey D.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2013, 86 (02): : 372 - 379
  • [32] Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) for adaptive image guided head and neck radiation therapy
    Hvid, Christian A.
    Elstrom, Ulrik V.
    Jensen, Kenneth
    Grau, Cai
    ACTA ONCOLOGICA, 2018, 57 (04) : 552 - 556
  • [33] Comparison of malignant calcification identification between breast cone-beam computed tomography and digital mammography
    Liu, Aidi
    Ma, Yue
    Yin, Lu
    Zhu, Yueqiang
    Lu, Hong
    Li, Haijie
    Ye, Zhaoxiang
    ACTA RADIOLOGICA, 2023, 64 (03) : 962 - 970
  • [34] Kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography imaging dose estimation and optimization: Need of daily cone-beam computed tomography
    Trivedi, Gaurav
    Dixit, Chandra K.
    Oinam, Arun S.
    Kapoor, Rakesh
    Bahl, Amit
    JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH AND THERAPEUTICS, 2019, 15 (03) : 470 - 474
  • [35] Scatter Correction in Cone-Beam Breast Computed Tomography: Simulations and Experiments
    Mettivier, G.
    Lanconelli, N.
    Lo Meo, S.
    Russo, P.
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NUCLEAR SCIENCE, 2012, 59 (05) : 2008 - 2019
  • [36] AlignRT in breast cancer, towards the end of cone-beam computed tomography ?
    Carlet, Frederic
    Vial, Nicolas
    Goyet, Dominique
    Develtere, Nicolas
    Bonhomme, Blandine
    Bonhomme, Bertrand
    Jadaud, Eric
    Saint-Gaudens, Anne Bareille
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2024, 194 : S535 - S537
  • [37] Measurement of the MTF of a Cone-Beam Breast Computed Tomography Laboratory Scanner
    Mettivier, Giovanni
    Russo, Paolo
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON NUCLEAR SCIENCE, 2011, 58 (03) : 703 - 713
  • [38] Measurement of the MTF of a Cone-Beam Breast Computed Tomography Laboratory Scanner
    Mettivier, Giovanni
    Montesi, Maria Cristina
    Lauria, Adele
    Russo, Paolo
    2009 IEEE NUCLEAR SCIENCE SYMPOSIUM CONFERENCE RECORD, VOLS 1-5, 2009, : 3958 - 3964
  • [39] Generating synthesized computed tomography (CT) from cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) using CycleGAN for adaptive radiation therapy
    Liang, Xiao
    Chen, Liyuan
    Dan Nguyen
    Zhou, Zhiguo
    Gu, Xuejun
    Yang, Ming
    Wang, Jing
    Jiang, Steve
    PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2019, 64 (12):
  • [40] Registration accuracy between intraoral-scanned and cone-beam computed tomography-scanned crowns in various registration methods
    Lim, Seung-Weon
    Hwang, Hyeon-Shik
    Cho, Il-Sik
    Baek, Seung-Hak
    Cho, Jin-Hyoung
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2020, 157 (03) : 348 - 356