Cargando…

A quantitative comparison of the performance of three deformable registration algorithms in radiotherapy

We present an evaluation of various non-rigid registration algorithms for the purpose of compensating interfractional motion of the target volume and organs at risk areas when acquiring CBCT image data prior to irradiation. Three different deformable registration (DR) methods were used: the Demons a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fabri, Daniella, Zambrano, Valentina, Bhatia, Amon, Furtado, Hugo, Bergmann, Helmar, Stock, Markus, Bloch, Christoph, Lütgendorf-Caucig, Carola, Pawiro, Supriyanto, Georg, Dietmar, Birkfellner, Wolfgang, Figl, Michael
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Urban & Fischer 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3865361/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23969092
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.zemedi.2013.07.006
Descripción
Sumario:We present an evaluation of various non-rigid registration algorithms for the purpose of compensating interfractional motion of the target volume and organs at risk areas when acquiring CBCT image data prior to irradiation. Three different deformable registration (DR) methods were used: the Demons algorithm implemented in the iPlan Software (BrainLAB AG, Feldkirchen, Germany) and two custom-developed piecewise methods using either a Normalized Correlation or a Mutual Information metric (featurelet(NC) and featurelet(MI)). These methods were tested on data acquired using a novel purpose-built phantom for deformable registration and clinical CT/CBCT data of prostate and lung cancer patients. The Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) between manually drawn contours and the contours generated by a derived deformation field of the structures in question was compared to the result obtained with rigid registration (RR). For the phantom, the piecewise methods were slightly superior, the featurelet(NC) for the intramodality and the featurelet(MI) for the intermodality registrations. For the prostate cases in less than 50% of the images studied the DSC was improved over RR. Deformable registration methods improved the outcome over a rigid registration for lung cases and in the phantom study, but not in a significant way for the prostate study. A significantly superior deformation method could not be identified.