Cargando…

A comparative assessment of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional ultrasound and cone beam CT

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of the Elekta Clarity™ three-dimensional ultrasound system (3DUS) was assessed for prostate positioning and compared to seed- and bone-based positioning in kilo-voltage cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) during a definitive radiotherapy. METHODS: The prostate positioning o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Minglun, Ballhausen, Hendrik, Hegemann, Nina-Sophie, Ganswindt, Ute, Manapov, Farkhad, Tritschler, Stefan, Roosen, Alexander, Gratzke, Christian, Reiner, Michael, Belka, Claus
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4465303/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25890013
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-015-0380-1
_version_ 1782376079140323328
author Li, Minglun
Ballhausen, Hendrik
Hegemann, Nina-Sophie
Ganswindt, Ute
Manapov, Farkhad
Tritschler, Stefan
Roosen, Alexander
Gratzke, Christian
Reiner, Michael
Belka, Claus
author_facet Li, Minglun
Ballhausen, Hendrik
Hegemann, Nina-Sophie
Ganswindt, Ute
Manapov, Farkhad
Tritschler, Stefan
Roosen, Alexander
Gratzke, Christian
Reiner, Michael
Belka, Claus
author_sort Li, Minglun
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The accuracy of the Elekta Clarity™ three-dimensional ultrasound system (3DUS) was assessed for prostate positioning and compared to seed- and bone-based positioning in kilo-voltage cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) during a definitive radiotherapy. METHODS: The prostate positioning of 6 patients, with fiducial markers implanted into the prostate, was controlled by 3DUS and CBCT. In total, 78 ultrasound scans were performed trans-abdominally and compared to bone-matches and seed-matches in CBCT scans. Setup errors detected by the different modalities were compared. Systematic and random errors were analysed, and optimal setup margins were calculated. RESULTS: The discrepancy between 3DUS and seed-match in CBCT was −0.2 ± 2.7 mm laterally, −1.9 ± 2.3 mm longitudinally and 0.0 ± 3.0 mm vertically and significant only in longitudinal direction. Using seed-match as reference, systematic errors of 3DUS were 1.3 mm laterally, 0.8 mm longitudinally and 1.4 mm vertically, and random errors were 2.5 mm laterally, 2.3 mm longitudinally, and 2.7 mm vertically. No significant difference could be detected for 3DUS in comparison to bone-match in CBCT. CONCLUSIONS: 3DUS is feasible for image guidance for patients with prostate cancer and appears comparable to CBCT based image guidance in the retrospective study. While 3DUS offers some distinct advantages such as no need of invasive fiducial implantation and avoidance of extra radiation, its disadvantages include the operator dependence of the technique and dependence on sufficient bladder filling. Further study of 3DUS for image guidance in a large patient cohort is warranted.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4465303
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44653032015-06-15 A comparative assessment of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional ultrasound and cone beam CT Li, Minglun Ballhausen, Hendrik Hegemann, Nina-Sophie Ganswindt, Ute Manapov, Farkhad Tritschler, Stefan Roosen, Alexander Gratzke, Christian Reiner, Michael Belka, Claus Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: The accuracy of the Elekta Clarity™ three-dimensional ultrasound system (3DUS) was assessed for prostate positioning and compared to seed- and bone-based positioning in kilo-voltage cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) during a definitive radiotherapy. METHODS: The prostate positioning of 6 patients, with fiducial markers implanted into the prostate, was controlled by 3DUS and CBCT. In total, 78 ultrasound scans were performed trans-abdominally and compared to bone-matches and seed-matches in CBCT scans. Setup errors detected by the different modalities were compared. Systematic and random errors were analysed, and optimal setup margins were calculated. RESULTS: The discrepancy between 3DUS and seed-match in CBCT was −0.2 ± 2.7 mm laterally, −1.9 ± 2.3 mm longitudinally and 0.0 ± 3.0 mm vertically and significant only in longitudinal direction. Using seed-match as reference, systematic errors of 3DUS were 1.3 mm laterally, 0.8 mm longitudinally and 1.4 mm vertically, and random errors were 2.5 mm laterally, 2.3 mm longitudinally, and 2.7 mm vertically. No significant difference could be detected for 3DUS in comparison to bone-match in CBCT. CONCLUSIONS: 3DUS is feasible for image guidance for patients with prostate cancer and appears comparable to CBCT based image guidance in the retrospective study. While 3DUS offers some distinct advantages such as no need of invasive fiducial implantation and avoidance of extra radiation, its disadvantages include the operator dependence of the technique and dependence on sufficient bladder filling. Further study of 3DUS for image guidance in a large patient cohort is warranted. BioMed Central 2015-04-09 /pmc/articles/PMC4465303/ /pubmed/25890013 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-015-0380-1 Text en © Li et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Li, Minglun
Ballhausen, Hendrik
Hegemann, Nina-Sophie
Ganswindt, Ute
Manapov, Farkhad
Tritschler, Stefan
Roosen, Alexander
Gratzke, Christian
Reiner, Michael
Belka, Claus
A comparative assessment of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional ultrasound and cone beam CT
title A comparative assessment of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional ultrasound and cone beam CT
title_full A comparative assessment of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional ultrasound and cone beam CT
title_fullStr A comparative assessment of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional ultrasound and cone beam CT
title_full_unstemmed A comparative assessment of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional ultrasound and cone beam CT
title_short A comparative assessment of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional ultrasound and cone beam CT
title_sort comparative assessment of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional ultrasound and cone beam ct
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4465303/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25890013
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-015-0380-1
work_keys_str_mv AT liminglun acomparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT ballhausenhendrik acomparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT hegemannninasophie acomparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT ganswindtute acomparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT manapovfarkhad acomparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT tritschlerstefan acomparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT roosenalexander acomparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT gratzkechristian acomparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT reinermichael acomparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT belkaclaus acomparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT liminglun comparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT ballhausenhendrik comparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT hegemannninasophie comparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT ganswindtute comparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT manapovfarkhad comparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT tritschlerstefan comparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT roosenalexander comparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT gratzkechristian comparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT reinermichael comparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct
AT belkaclaus comparativeassessmentofprostatepositioningguidedbythreedimensionalultrasoundandconebeamct