Cargando…
Evaluation of 4D CT acquisition methods designed to reduce artifacts
Four‐dimensional computed tomography (4D CT) is used to account for respiratory motion in radiation treatment planning, but artifacts resulting from the acquisition and postprocessing limit its accuracy. We investigated the efficacy of three experimental 4D CT acquisition methods to reduce artifacts...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4504190/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26103169 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i2.4949 |
_version_ | 1782381443992780800 |
---|---|
author | Castillo, Sarah J. Castillo, Richard Castillo, Edward Pan, Tinsu Ibbott, Geoffrey Balter, Peter Hobbs, Brian Guerrero, Thomas |
author_facet | Castillo, Sarah J. Castillo, Richard Castillo, Edward Pan, Tinsu Ibbott, Geoffrey Balter, Peter Hobbs, Brian Guerrero, Thomas |
author_sort | Castillo, Sarah J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Four‐dimensional computed tomography (4D CT) is used to account for respiratory motion in radiation treatment planning, but artifacts resulting from the acquisition and postprocessing limit its accuracy. We investigated the efficacy of three experimental 4D CT acquisition methods to reduce artifacts in a prospective institutional review board approved study. Eighteen thoracic patients scheduled to undergo radiation therapy received standard clinical 4D CT scans followed by each of the alternative 4D CT acquisitions: 1) data oversampling, 2) beam gating with breathing irregularities, and 3) rescanning the clinical acquisition acquired during irregular breathing. Relative values of a validated correlation‐based artifact metric (CM) determined the best acquisition method per patient. Each 4D CT was processed by an extended phase sorting approach that optimizes the quantitative artifact metric (CM sorting). The clinical acquisitions were also postprocessed by phase sorting for artifact comparison of our current clinical implementation with the experimental methods. The oversampling acquisition achieved the lowest artifact presence among all acquisitions, achieving a 27% reduction from the current clinical 4D CT implementation ([Formula: see text]). The rescan method presented a significantly higher artifact presence from the clinical acquisition (37%; [Formula: see text]), the gating acquisition (26%; [Formula: see text]), and the oversampling acquisition (31%; [Formula: see text]), while the data lacked evidence of a significant difference between the clinical, gating, and oversampling methods. The oversampling acquisition reduced artifact presence from the current clinical 4D CT implementation to the largest degree and provided the simplest and most reproducible implementation. The rescan acquisition increased artifact presence significantly, compared to all acquisitions, and suffered from combination of data from independent scans over which large internal anatomic shifts occurred. PACS numbers: 87.57.C‐, 87.57.cp, 87.57.Q‐, 87.55.Gh |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4504190 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45041902018-04-02 Evaluation of 4D CT acquisition methods designed to reduce artifacts Castillo, Sarah J. Castillo, Richard Castillo, Edward Pan, Tinsu Ibbott, Geoffrey Balter, Peter Hobbs, Brian Guerrero, Thomas J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics Four‐dimensional computed tomography (4D CT) is used to account for respiratory motion in radiation treatment planning, but artifacts resulting from the acquisition and postprocessing limit its accuracy. We investigated the efficacy of three experimental 4D CT acquisition methods to reduce artifacts in a prospective institutional review board approved study. Eighteen thoracic patients scheduled to undergo radiation therapy received standard clinical 4D CT scans followed by each of the alternative 4D CT acquisitions: 1) data oversampling, 2) beam gating with breathing irregularities, and 3) rescanning the clinical acquisition acquired during irregular breathing. Relative values of a validated correlation‐based artifact metric (CM) determined the best acquisition method per patient. Each 4D CT was processed by an extended phase sorting approach that optimizes the quantitative artifact metric (CM sorting). The clinical acquisitions were also postprocessed by phase sorting for artifact comparison of our current clinical implementation with the experimental methods. The oversampling acquisition achieved the lowest artifact presence among all acquisitions, achieving a 27% reduction from the current clinical 4D CT implementation ([Formula: see text]). The rescan method presented a significantly higher artifact presence from the clinical acquisition (37%; [Formula: see text]), the gating acquisition (26%; [Formula: see text]), and the oversampling acquisition (31%; [Formula: see text]), while the data lacked evidence of a significant difference between the clinical, gating, and oversampling methods. The oversampling acquisition reduced artifact presence from the current clinical 4D CT implementation to the largest degree and provided the simplest and most reproducible implementation. The rescan acquisition increased artifact presence significantly, compared to all acquisitions, and suffered from combination of data from independent scans over which large internal anatomic shifts occurred. PACS numbers: 87.57.C‐, 87.57.cp, 87.57.Q‐, 87.55.Gh John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015-03-08 /pmc/articles/PMC4504190/ /pubmed/26103169 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i2.4949 Text en © 2015 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Radiation Oncology Physics Castillo, Sarah J. Castillo, Richard Castillo, Edward Pan, Tinsu Ibbott, Geoffrey Balter, Peter Hobbs, Brian Guerrero, Thomas Evaluation of 4D CT acquisition methods designed to reduce artifacts |
title | Evaluation of 4D CT acquisition methods designed to reduce artifacts |
title_full | Evaluation of 4D CT acquisition methods designed to reduce artifacts |
title_fullStr | Evaluation of 4D CT acquisition methods designed to reduce artifacts |
title_full_unstemmed | Evaluation of 4D CT acquisition methods designed to reduce artifacts |
title_short | Evaluation of 4D CT acquisition methods designed to reduce artifacts |
title_sort | evaluation of 4d ct acquisition methods designed to reduce artifacts |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4504190/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26103169 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i2.4949 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT castillosarahj evaluationof4dctacquisitionmethodsdesignedtoreduceartifacts AT castillorichard evaluationof4dctacquisitionmethodsdesignedtoreduceartifacts AT castilloedward evaluationof4dctacquisitionmethodsdesignedtoreduceartifacts AT pantinsu evaluationof4dctacquisitionmethodsdesignedtoreduceartifacts AT ibbottgeoffrey evaluationof4dctacquisitionmethodsdesignedtoreduceartifacts AT balterpeter evaluationof4dctacquisitionmethodsdesignedtoreduceartifacts AT hobbsbrian evaluationof4dctacquisitionmethodsdesignedtoreduceartifacts AT guerrerothomas evaluationof4dctacquisitionmethodsdesignedtoreduceartifacts |