Cargando…

Comparative evaluation of target volumes defined by deformable and rigid registration of diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT in primary esophageal cancer

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the geometrical differences of target volumes propagated by deformable image registration (DIR) and rigid image registration (RIR) to assist target volume delineation between diagnostic Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and planning CT for primary esop...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guo, Yanluan, Li, Jianbin, Zhang, Peng, Shao, Qian, Xu, Min, Li, Yankang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5228653/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28072693
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000005528
_version_ 1782493980895739904
author Guo, Yanluan
Li, Jianbin
Zhang, Peng
Shao, Qian
Xu, Min
Li, Yankang
author_facet Guo, Yanluan
Li, Jianbin
Zhang, Peng
Shao, Qian
Xu, Min
Li, Yankang
author_sort Guo, Yanluan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: To evaluate the geometrical differences of target volumes propagated by deformable image registration (DIR) and rigid image registration (RIR) to assist target volume delineation between diagnostic Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and planning CT for primary esophageal cancer (EC). METHODS: Twenty-five patients with EC sequentially underwent a diagnostic (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) PET/CT scan and planning CT simulation. Only 19 patients with maximum standardized uptake value (SUV(max)) ≥ 2.0 of the primary volume were available. Gross tumor volumes (GTVs) were delineated using CT and PET display settings. The PET/CT images were then registered with planning CT using MIM software. Subsequently, the PET and CT contours were propagated by RIR and DIR to planning CT. The properties of these volumes were compared. RESULTS: When GTV(CT) delineated on CT of PET/CT after both RIR and DIR was compared with GTV contoured on planning CT, significant improvements using DIR were observed in the volume, displacements of the center of mass (COM) in the 3-dimensional (3D) direction, and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) (P = 0.003; 0.006; 0.014). Although similar improvements were not observed for the same comparison using DIR for propagated PET contours from diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT (P > 0.05), for DSC and displacements of COM in the 3D direction of PET contours, the DIR resulted in the improved volume of a large percentage of patients (73.7%; 68.45%; 63.2%) compared with RIR. For diagnostic CT-based contours or PET contours at SUV(2.5) propagated by DIR with planning CT, the DSC and displacements of COM in 3D directions in the distal segment were significantly improved compared to the upper and middle segments (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: We observed a trend that deformable registration might improve the overlap for gross target volumes from diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT. The distal EC might benefit more from DIR.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5228653
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52286532017-01-25 Comparative evaluation of target volumes defined by deformable and rigid registration of diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT in primary esophageal cancer Guo, Yanluan Li, Jianbin Zhang, Peng Shao, Qian Xu, Min Li, Yankang Medicine (Baltimore) 5700 BACKGROUND: To evaluate the geometrical differences of target volumes propagated by deformable image registration (DIR) and rigid image registration (RIR) to assist target volume delineation between diagnostic Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) and planning CT for primary esophageal cancer (EC). METHODS: Twenty-five patients with EC sequentially underwent a diagnostic (18)F-fluorodeoxyglucose ((18)F-FDG) PET/CT scan and planning CT simulation. Only 19 patients with maximum standardized uptake value (SUV(max)) ≥ 2.0 of the primary volume were available. Gross tumor volumes (GTVs) were delineated using CT and PET display settings. The PET/CT images were then registered with planning CT using MIM software. Subsequently, the PET and CT contours were propagated by RIR and DIR to planning CT. The properties of these volumes were compared. RESULTS: When GTV(CT) delineated on CT of PET/CT after both RIR and DIR was compared with GTV contoured on planning CT, significant improvements using DIR were observed in the volume, displacements of the center of mass (COM) in the 3-dimensional (3D) direction, and Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) (P = 0.003; 0.006; 0.014). Although similar improvements were not observed for the same comparison using DIR for propagated PET contours from diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT (P > 0.05), for DSC and displacements of COM in the 3D direction of PET contours, the DIR resulted in the improved volume of a large percentage of patients (73.7%; 68.45%; 63.2%) compared with RIR. For diagnostic CT-based contours or PET contours at SUV(2.5) propagated by DIR with planning CT, the DSC and displacements of COM in 3D directions in the distal segment were significantly improved compared to the upper and middle segments (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: We observed a trend that deformable registration might improve the overlap for gross target volumes from diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT. The distal EC might benefit more from DIR. Wolters Kluwer Health 2017-01-10 /pmc/articles/PMC5228653/ /pubmed/28072693 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000005528 Text en Copyright © 2017 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
spellingShingle 5700
Guo, Yanluan
Li, Jianbin
Zhang, Peng
Shao, Qian
Xu, Min
Li, Yankang
Comparative evaluation of target volumes defined by deformable and rigid registration of diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT in primary esophageal cancer
title Comparative evaluation of target volumes defined by deformable and rigid registration of diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT in primary esophageal cancer
title_full Comparative evaluation of target volumes defined by deformable and rigid registration of diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT in primary esophageal cancer
title_fullStr Comparative evaluation of target volumes defined by deformable and rigid registration of diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT in primary esophageal cancer
title_full_unstemmed Comparative evaluation of target volumes defined by deformable and rigid registration of diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT in primary esophageal cancer
title_short Comparative evaluation of target volumes defined by deformable and rigid registration of diagnostic PET/CT to planning CT in primary esophageal cancer
title_sort comparative evaluation of target volumes defined by deformable and rigid registration of diagnostic pet/ct to planning ct in primary esophageal cancer
topic 5700
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5228653/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28072693
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000005528
work_keys_str_mv AT guoyanluan comparativeevaluationoftargetvolumesdefinedbydeformableandrigidregistrationofdiagnosticpetcttoplanningctinprimaryesophagealcancer
AT lijianbin comparativeevaluationoftargetvolumesdefinedbydeformableandrigidregistrationofdiagnosticpetcttoplanningctinprimaryesophagealcancer
AT zhangpeng comparativeevaluationoftargetvolumesdefinedbydeformableandrigidregistrationofdiagnosticpetcttoplanningctinprimaryesophagealcancer
AT shaoqian comparativeevaluationoftargetvolumesdefinedbydeformableandrigidregistrationofdiagnosticpetcttoplanningctinprimaryesophagealcancer
AT xumin comparativeevaluationoftargetvolumesdefinedbydeformableandrigidregistrationofdiagnosticpetcttoplanningctinprimaryesophagealcancer
AT liyankang comparativeevaluationoftargetvolumesdefinedbydeformableandrigidregistrationofdiagnosticpetcttoplanningctinprimaryesophagealcancer