Cargando…

Dosimetric effects of manual cone‐beam CT (CBCT) matching for spinal radiosurgery: Our experience

Radiosurgical treatment of cranial or extracranial targets demands accurate positioning of the isocenter at the beam and table isocenter, and immobilization of the target during treatment. For spinal radiosurgery, the standard approach involves matching of cone‐beam CT (CBCT) in‐room images with the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schreibmann, Eduard, Fox, Tim, Crocker, Ian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5718648/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21844858
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v12i3.3467
_version_ 1783284355259432960
author Schreibmann, Eduard
Fox, Tim
Crocker, Ian
author_facet Schreibmann, Eduard
Fox, Tim
Crocker, Ian
author_sort Schreibmann, Eduard
collection PubMed
description Radiosurgical treatment of cranial or extracranial targets demands accurate positioning of the isocenter at the beam and table isocenter, and immobilization of the target during treatment. For spinal radiosurgery, the standard approach involves matching of cone‐beam CT (CBCT) in‐room images with the planning CT (pCT) to determine translation and yaw corrections. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of these techniques compared to advanced automatching using mutual information metrics, with consideration given to volume of interest (VOI) and optimizing translations and rotations in all axes. The dosimetric consequences of our current standard matching techniques were also evaluated. Ten consecutive spinal radiosurgery patients treated in the last year were subjected to analysis. For purposes of this analysis, the automatch using mutual information and a VOI was considered to create “the true isocenter” for positioning the patients. Review of the imaging from this automatch confirmed perfect superimposition of the two datasets within the VOI. Matching the CBCT to the pCT using the automatch allowed assessment of the rotations which had been previously ignored. Recalculation of the dose volume histogram was undertaken for each patient, assuming displacement of the true isocenter to the treated isocenter. Comparisons between the delivered doses and the intended doses were made. The mean absolute lateral/vertical/longitudinal translations and vector displacement between the manual CBCT‐pCT matching isocenter and the true isocenter were 0.13, [Formula: see text] , and [Formula: see text] , with a minimum and maximum individual pixel vector shift of 3.2 and 8.94 mm. The mean pitch, yaw, and roll correction for automatch was [Formula: see text] , 0.25°, and 0.97° with a maximum of 1.65°, 2.92°, and 1.43°. Four of ten patients had a significant change in the coverage of the tumor due to lack of correction of translational and rotational errors. The largest errors were observed in patients with small and irregular target volumes. Our initial results show that precise positioning for spinal radiosurgery cannot be accomplished with manual pCT‐CBCT matching without a clinical strategy to compensate for rotations. In the absence of this, significant underdosing of the tumor may occur. PACS number: 87.55.Qr, 87.57.uq, 87.55.km
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5718648
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57186482018-04-02 Dosimetric effects of manual cone‐beam CT (CBCT) matching for spinal radiosurgery: Our experience Schreibmann, Eduard Fox, Tim Crocker, Ian J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics Radiosurgical treatment of cranial or extracranial targets demands accurate positioning of the isocenter at the beam and table isocenter, and immobilization of the target during treatment. For spinal radiosurgery, the standard approach involves matching of cone‐beam CT (CBCT) in‐room images with the planning CT (pCT) to determine translation and yaw corrections. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of these techniques compared to advanced automatching using mutual information metrics, with consideration given to volume of interest (VOI) and optimizing translations and rotations in all axes. The dosimetric consequences of our current standard matching techniques were also evaluated. Ten consecutive spinal radiosurgery patients treated in the last year were subjected to analysis. For purposes of this analysis, the automatch using mutual information and a VOI was considered to create “the true isocenter” for positioning the patients. Review of the imaging from this automatch confirmed perfect superimposition of the two datasets within the VOI. Matching the CBCT to the pCT using the automatch allowed assessment of the rotations which had been previously ignored. Recalculation of the dose volume histogram was undertaken for each patient, assuming displacement of the true isocenter to the treated isocenter. Comparisons between the delivered doses and the intended doses were made. The mean absolute lateral/vertical/longitudinal translations and vector displacement between the manual CBCT‐pCT matching isocenter and the true isocenter were 0.13, [Formula: see text] , and [Formula: see text] , with a minimum and maximum individual pixel vector shift of 3.2 and 8.94 mm. The mean pitch, yaw, and roll correction for automatch was [Formula: see text] , 0.25°, and 0.97° with a maximum of 1.65°, 2.92°, and 1.43°. Four of ten patients had a significant change in the coverage of the tumor due to lack of correction of translational and rotational errors. The largest errors were observed in patients with small and irregular target volumes. Our initial results show that precise positioning for spinal radiosurgery cannot be accomplished with manual pCT‐CBCT matching without a clinical strategy to compensate for rotations. In the absence of this, significant underdosing of the tumor may occur. PACS number: 87.55.Qr, 87.57.uq, 87.55.km John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2011-04-13 /pmc/articles/PMC5718648/ /pubmed/21844858 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v12i3.3467 Text en © 2011 The Authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (https://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
Schreibmann, Eduard
Fox, Tim
Crocker, Ian
Dosimetric effects of manual cone‐beam CT (CBCT) matching for spinal radiosurgery: Our experience
title Dosimetric effects of manual cone‐beam CT (CBCT) matching for spinal radiosurgery: Our experience
title_full Dosimetric effects of manual cone‐beam CT (CBCT) matching for spinal radiosurgery: Our experience
title_fullStr Dosimetric effects of manual cone‐beam CT (CBCT) matching for spinal radiosurgery: Our experience
title_full_unstemmed Dosimetric effects of manual cone‐beam CT (CBCT) matching for spinal radiosurgery: Our experience
title_short Dosimetric effects of manual cone‐beam CT (CBCT) matching for spinal radiosurgery: Our experience
title_sort dosimetric effects of manual cone‐beam ct (cbct) matching for spinal radiosurgery: our experience
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5718648/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21844858
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v12i3.3467
work_keys_str_mv AT schreibmanneduard dosimetriceffectsofmanualconebeamctcbctmatchingforspinalradiosurgeryourexperience
AT foxtim dosimetriceffectsofmanualconebeamctcbctmatchingforspinalradiosurgeryourexperience
AT crockerian dosimetriceffectsofmanualconebeamctcbctmatchingforspinalradiosurgeryourexperience