Cargando…

Initial results for patient setup verification using transperineal ultrasound and cone beam CT in external beam radiation therapy of prostate cancer

BACKGROUND: Evaluation of set up error detection by a transperineal ultrasound in comparison with a cone beam CT (CBCT) based system in external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) of prostate cancer. METHODS: Setup verification was performed with transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) and CBCT for 10 patients t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Richter, Anne, Polat, Bülent, Lawrenz, Ingulf, Weick, Stefan, Sauer, Otto, Flentje, Michael, Mantel, Frederick
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5101794/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27825386
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-016-0722-7
_version_ 1782466351503245312
author Richter, Anne
Polat, Bülent
Lawrenz, Ingulf
Weick, Stefan
Sauer, Otto
Flentje, Michael
Mantel, Frederick
author_facet Richter, Anne
Polat, Bülent
Lawrenz, Ingulf
Weick, Stefan
Sauer, Otto
Flentje, Michael
Mantel, Frederick
author_sort Richter, Anne
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Evaluation of set up error detection by a transperineal ultrasound in comparison with a cone beam CT (CBCT) based system in external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) of prostate cancer. METHODS: Setup verification was performed with transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) and CBCT for 10 patients treated with EBRT for prostate cancer. In total, 150 ultrasound and CBCT scans were acquired in rapid succession and analyzed for setup errors. The deviation between setup errors of the two modalities was evaluated separately for each dimension. RESULTS: A moderate correlation in lateral, vertical and longitudinal direction was observed comparing the setup errors. Mean differences between TPUS and CBCT were (−2.7 ± 2.3) mm, (3.0 ± 2.4) mm and (3.2 ± 2.7) mm in lateral, vertical and longitudinal direction, respectively. The mean Euclidean difference between TPUS and CBCT was (6.0 ± 3.1) mm. Differences up to 19.2 mm were observed between the two imaging modalities. Discrepancies between TPUS and CBCT of at least 5 mm occurred in 58 % of monitored treatment sessions. CONCLUSION: Setup differences between TPUS and CBCT are 6 mm on average. Although the correlation of the setup errors determined by the two different image modalities is rather week, the combination of setup verification by CBCT and intrafraction motion monitoring by TPUS imaging can use the benefits of both imaging modalities.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5101794
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-51017942016-11-10 Initial results for patient setup verification using transperineal ultrasound and cone beam CT in external beam radiation therapy of prostate cancer Richter, Anne Polat, Bülent Lawrenz, Ingulf Weick, Stefan Sauer, Otto Flentje, Michael Mantel, Frederick Radiat Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Evaluation of set up error detection by a transperineal ultrasound in comparison with a cone beam CT (CBCT) based system in external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) of prostate cancer. METHODS: Setup verification was performed with transperineal ultrasound (TPUS) and CBCT for 10 patients treated with EBRT for prostate cancer. In total, 150 ultrasound and CBCT scans were acquired in rapid succession and analyzed for setup errors. The deviation between setup errors of the two modalities was evaluated separately for each dimension. RESULTS: A moderate correlation in lateral, vertical and longitudinal direction was observed comparing the setup errors. Mean differences between TPUS and CBCT were (−2.7 ± 2.3) mm, (3.0 ± 2.4) mm and (3.2 ± 2.7) mm in lateral, vertical and longitudinal direction, respectively. The mean Euclidean difference between TPUS and CBCT was (6.0 ± 3.1) mm. Differences up to 19.2 mm were observed between the two imaging modalities. Discrepancies between TPUS and CBCT of at least 5 mm occurred in 58 % of monitored treatment sessions. CONCLUSION: Setup differences between TPUS and CBCT are 6 mm on average. Although the correlation of the setup errors determined by the two different image modalities is rather week, the combination of setup verification by CBCT and intrafraction motion monitoring by TPUS imaging can use the benefits of both imaging modalities. BioMed Central 2016-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5101794/ /pubmed/27825386 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-016-0722-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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
Richter, Anne
Polat, Bülent
Lawrenz, Ingulf
Weick, Stefan
Sauer, Otto
Flentje, Michael
Mantel, Frederick
Initial results for patient setup verification using transperineal ultrasound and cone beam CT in external beam radiation therapy of prostate cancer
title Initial results for patient setup verification using transperineal ultrasound and cone beam CT in external beam radiation therapy of prostate cancer
title_full Initial results for patient setup verification using transperineal ultrasound and cone beam CT in external beam radiation therapy of prostate cancer
title_fullStr Initial results for patient setup verification using transperineal ultrasound and cone beam CT in external beam radiation therapy of prostate cancer
title_full_unstemmed Initial results for patient setup verification using transperineal ultrasound and cone beam CT in external beam radiation therapy of prostate cancer
title_short Initial results for patient setup verification using transperineal ultrasound and cone beam CT in external beam radiation therapy of prostate cancer
title_sort initial results for patient setup verification using transperineal ultrasound and cone beam ct in external beam radiation therapy of prostate cancer
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5101794/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27825386
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13014-016-0722-7
work_keys_str_mv AT richteranne initialresultsforpatientsetupverificationusingtransperinealultrasoundandconebeamctinexternalbeamradiationtherapyofprostatecancer
AT polatbulent initialresultsforpatientsetupverificationusingtransperinealultrasoundandconebeamctinexternalbeamradiationtherapyofprostatecancer
AT lawrenzingulf initialresultsforpatientsetupverificationusingtransperinealultrasoundandconebeamctinexternalbeamradiationtherapyofprostatecancer
AT weickstefan initialresultsforpatientsetupverificationusingtransperinealultrasoundandconebeamctinexternalbeamradiationtherapyofprostatecancer
AT sauerotto initialresultsforpatientsetupverificationusingtransperinealultrasoundandconebeamctinexternalbeamradiationtherapyofprostatecancer
AT flentjemichael initialresultsforpatientsetupverificationusingtransperinealultrasoundandconebeamctinexternalbeamradiationtherapyofprostatecancer
AT mantelfrederick initialresultsforpatientsetupverificationusingtransperinealultrasoundandconebeamctinexternalbeamradiationtherapyofprostatecancer