Cargando…

Comparison of Online 6 Degree-of-Freedom Image Registration of Varian TrueBeam Cone-Beam CT and BrainLab ExacTrac X-Ray for Intracranial Radiosurgery

PURPOSE: The study was aimed to compare online 6 degree-of-freedom image registrations of TrueBeam cone-beam computed tomography and BrainLab ExacTrac X-ray imaging systems for intracranial radiosurgery. METHODS: Phantom and patient studies were performed on a Varian TrueBeam STx linear accelerator...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Jun, Shi, Wenyin, Andrews, David, Werner-Wasik, Maria, Lu, Bo, Yu, Yan, Dicker, Adam, Liu, Haisong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5616049/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28462690
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1533034616683069
_version_ 1783266715491106816
author Li, Jun
Shi, Wenyin
Andrews, David
Werner-Wasik, Maria
Lu, Bo
Yu, Yan
Dicker, Adam
Liu, Haisong
author_facet Li, Jun
Shi, Wenyin
Andrews, David
Werner-Wasik, Maria
Lu, Bo
Yu, Yan
Dicker, Adam
Liu, Haisong
author_sort Li, Jun
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The study was aimed to compare online 6 degree-of-freedom image registrations of TrueBeam cone-beam computed tomography and BrainLab ExacTrac X-ray imaging systems for intracranial radiosurgery. METHODS: Phantom and patient studies were performed on a Varian TrueBeam STx linear accelerator (version 2.5), which is integrated with a BrainLab ExacTrac imaging system (version 6.1.1). The phantom study was based on a Rando head phantom and was designed to evaluate isocenter location dependence of the image registrations. Ten isocenters at various locations representing clinical treatment sites were selected in the phantom. Cone-beam computed tomography and ExacTrac X-ray images were taken when the phantom was located at each isocenter. The patient study included 34 patients. Cone-beam computed tomography and ExacTrac X-ray images were taken at each patient’s treatment position. The 6 degree-of-freedom image registrations were performed on cone-beam computed tomography and ExacTrac, and residual errors calculated from cone-beam computed tomography and ExacTrac were compared. RESULTS: In the phantom study, the average residual error differences (absolute values) between cone-beam computed tomography and ExacTrac image registrations were 0.17 ± 0.11 mm, 0.36 ± 0.20 mm, and 0.25 ± 0.11 mm in the vertical, longitudinal, and lateral directions, respectively. The average residual error differences in the rotation, roll, and pitch were 0.34° ± 0.08°, 0.13° ± 0.09°, and 0.12° ± 0.10°, respectively. In the patient study, the average residual error differences in the vertical, longitudinal, and lateral directions were 0.20 ± 0.16 mm, 0.30 ± 0.18 mm, 0.21 ± 0.18 mm, respectively. The average residual error differences in the rotation, roll, and pitch were 0.40°± 0.16°, 0.17° ± 0.13°, and 0.20° ± 0.14°, respectively. Overall, the average residual error differences were <0.4 mm in the translational directions and <0.5° in the rotational directions. ExacTrac X-ray image registration is comparable to TrueBeam cone-beam computed tomography image registration in intracranial treatments.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5616049
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56160492017-10-03 Comparison of Online 6 Degree-of-Freedom Image Registration of Varian TrueBeam Cone-Beam CT and BrainLab ExacTrac X-Ray for Intracranial Radiosurgery Li, Jun Shi, Wenyin Andrews, David Werner-Wasik, Maria Lu, Bo Yu, Yan Dicker, Adam Liu, Haisong Technol Cancer Res Treat Articles PURPOSE: The study was aimed to compare online 6 degree-of-freedom image registrations of TrueBeam cone-beam computed tomography and BrainLab ExacTrac X-ray imaging systems for intracranial radiosurgery. METHODS: Phantom and patient studies were performed on a Varian TrueBeam STx linear accelerator (version 2.5), which is integrated with a BrainLab ExacTrac imaging system (version 6.1.1). The phantom study was based on a Rando head phantom and was designed to evaluate isocenter location dependence of the image registrations. Ten isocenters at various locations representing clinical treatment sites were selected in the phantom. Cone-beam computed tomography and ExacTrac X-ray images were taken when the phantom was located at each isocenter. The patient study included 34 patients. Cone-beam computed tomography and ExacTrac X-ray images were taken at each patient’s treatment position. The 6 degree-of-freedom image registrations were performed on cone-beam computed tomography and ExacTrac, and residual errors calculated from cone-beam computed tomography and ExacTrac were compared. RESULTS: In the phantom study, the average residual error differences (absolute values) between cone-beam computed tomography and ExacTrac image registrations were 0.17 ± 0.11 mm, 0.36 ± 0.20 mm, and 0.25 ± 0.11 mm in the vertical, longitudinal, and lateral directions, respectively. The average residual error differences in the rotation, roll, and pitch were 0.34° ± 0.08°, 0.13° ± 0.09°, and 0.12° ± 0.10°, respectively. In the patient study, the average residual error differences in the vertical, longitudinal, and lateral directions were 0.20 ± 0.16 mm, 0.30 ± 0.18 mm, 0.21 ± 0.18 mm, respectively. The average residual error differences in the rotation, roll, and pitch were 0.40°± 0.16°, 0.17° ± 0.13°, and 0.20° ± 0.14°, respectively. Overall, the average residual error differences were <0.4 mm in the translational directions and <0.5° in the rotational directions. ExacTrac X-ray image registration is comparable to TrueBeam cone-beam computed tomography image registration in intracranial treatments. SAGE Publications 2016-12-14 2017-06 /pmc/articles/PMC5616049/ /pubmed/28462690 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1533034616683069 Text en © The Author(s) 2016 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Articles
Li, Jun
Shi, Wenyin
Andrews, David
Werner-Wasik, Maria
Lu, Bo
Yu, Yan
Dicker, Adam
Liu, Haisong
Comparison of Online 6 Degree-of-Freedom Image Registration of Varian TrueBeam Cone-Beam CT and BrainLab ExacTrac X-Ray for Intracranial Radiosurgery
title Comparison of Online 6 Degree-of-Freedom Image Registration of Varian TrueBeam Cone-Beam CT and BrainLab ExacTrac X-Ray for Intracranial Radiosurgery
title_full Comparison of Online 6 Degree-of-Freedom Image Registration of Varian TrueBeam Cone-Beam CT and BrainLab ExacTrac X-Ray for Intracranial Radiosurgery
title_fullStr Comparison of Online 6 Degree-of-Freedom Image Registration of Varian TrueBeam Cone-Beam CT and BrainLab ExacTrac X-Ray for Intracranial Radiosurgery
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Online 6 Degree-of-Freedom Image Registration of Varian TrueBeam Cone-Beam CT and BrainLab ExacTrac X-Ray for Intracranial Radiosurgery
title_short Comparison of Online 6 Degree-of-Freedom Image Registration of Varian TrueBeam Cone-Beam CT and BrainLab ExacTrac X-Ray for Intracranial Radiosurgery
title_sort comparison of online 6 degree-of-freedom image registration of varian truebeam cone-beam ct and brainlab exactrac x-ray for intracranial radiosurgery
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5616049/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28462690
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1533034616683069
work_keys_str_mv AT lijun comparisonofonline6degreeoffreedomimageregistrationofvariantruebeamconebeamctandbrainlabexactracxrayforintracranialradiosurgery
AT shiwenyin comparisonofonline6degreeoffreedomimageregistrationofvariantruebeamconebeamctandbrainlabexactracxrayforintracranialradiosurgery
AT andrewsdavid comparisonofonline6degreeoffreedomimageregistrationofvariantruebeamconebeamctandbrainlabexactracxrayforintracranialradiosurgery
AT wernerwasikmaria comparisonofonline6degreeoffreedomimageregistrationofvariantruebeamconebeamctandbrainlabexactracxrayforintracranialradiosurgery
AT lubo comparisonofonline6degreeoffreedomimageregistrationofvariantruebeamconebeamctandbrainlabexactracxrayforintracranialradiosurgery
AT yuyan comparisonofonline6degreeoffreedomimageregistrationofvariantruebeamconebeamctandbrainlabexactracxrayforintracranialradiosurgery
AT dickeradam comparisonofonline6degreeoffreedomimageregistrationofvariantruebeamconebeamctandbrainlabexactracxrayforintracranialradiosurgery
AT liuhaisong comparisonofonline6degreeoffreedomimageregistrationofvariantruebeamconebeamctandbrainlabexactracxrayforintracranialradiosurgery