Cargando…

Improvements in CBCT Image Quality Using a Novel Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm: A Clinical Evaluation

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of a novel iterative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) reconstruction algorithm for prostate and head and neck (HN) cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 10 patients with HN and 10 patients with prostate cancer were analyzed. For each...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gardner, Stephen J., Mao, Weihua, Liu, Chang, Aref, Ibrahim, Elshaikh, Mohamed, Lee, Joon K., Pradhan, Deepak, Movsas, Benjamin, Chetty, Indrin J., Siddiqui, Farzan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6460237/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31011685
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2018.12.003
_version_ 1783410294930800640
author Gardner, Stephen J.
Mao, Weihua
Liu, Chang
Aref, Ibrahim
Elshaikh, Mohamed
Lee, Joon K.
Pradhan, Deepak
Movsas, Benjamin
Chetty, Indrin J.
Siddiqui, Farzan
author_facet Gardner, Stephen J.
Mao, Weihua
Liu, Chang
Aref, Ibrahim
Elshaikh, Mohamed
Lee, Joon K.
Pradhan, Deepak
Movsas, Benjamin
Chetty, Indrin J.
Siddiqui, Farzan
author_sort Gardner, Stephen J.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of a novel iterative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) reconstruction algorithm for prostate and head and neck (HN) cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 10 patients with HN and 10 patients with prostate cancer were analyzed. For each patient, raw CBCT acquisition data were used to reconstruct images with a currently available algorithm (FDK_CBCT) and novel iterative algorithm (Iterative_CBCT). Quantitative contouring variation analysis was performed using structures delineated by several radiation oncologists. For prostate, observers contoured the prostate, proximal 2 cm seminal vesicles, bladder, and rectum. For HN, observers contoured the brain stem, spinal canal, right-left parotid glands, and right-left submandibular glands. Observer contours were combined to form a reference consensus contour using the simultaneous truth and performance level estimation method. All observer contours then were compared with the reference contour to calculate the Dice coefficient, Hausdorff distance, and mean contour distance (prostate contour only). Qualitative image quality analysis was performed using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (much superior image quality for Iterative_CBCT) to 5 (much inferior image quality for Iterative_CBCT). RESULTS: The Iterative_CBCT data sets resulted in a prostate contour Dice coefficient improvement of approximately 2.4% (P = .029). The average prostate contour Dice coefficient for the Iterative_CBCT data sets was improved for all patients, with improvements up to approximately 10% for 1 patient. The mean contour distance results indicate an approximate 15% reduction in mean contouring error for all prostate regions. For the parotid contours, Iterative_CBCT data sets resulted in a Hausdorff distance improvement of approximately 2 mm (P < .01) and an approximate 2% improvement in Dice coefficient (P = .03). The Iterative_CBCT data sets were scored as equivalent or of better image quality for 97.3% (prostate) and 90.0% (HN) of the patient data sets. CONCLUSIONS: Observers noted an improvement in image uniformity, noise level, and overall image quality for Iterative_CBCT data sets. In addition, expert observers displayed an improved ability to consistently delineate soft tissue structures, such as the prostate and parotid glands. Thus, the novel iterative reconstruction algorithm analyzed in this study is capable of improving the visualization for prostate and HN cancer image guided radiation therapy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6460237
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64602372019-04-22 Improvements in CBCT Image Quality Using a Novel Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm: A Clinical Evaluation Gardner, Stephen J. Mao, Weihua Liu, Chang Aref, Ibrahim Elshaikh, Mohamed Lee, Joon K. Pradhan, Deepak Movsas, Benjamin Chetty, Indrin J. Siddiqui, Farzan Adv Radiat Oncol Physics Contribution PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of a novel iterative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) reconstruction algorithm for prostate and head and neck (HN) cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 10 patients with HN and 10 patients with prostate cancer were analyzed. For each patient, raw CBCT acquisition data were used to reconstruct images with a currently available algorithm (FDK_CBCT) and novel iterative algorithm (Iterative_CBCT). Quantitative contouring variation analysis was performed using structures delineated by several radiation oncologists. For prostate, observers contoured the prostate, proximal 2 cm seminal vesicles, bladder, and rectum. For HN, observers contoured the brain stem, spinal canal, right-left parotid glands, and right-left submandibular glands. Observer contours were combined to form a reference consensus contour using the simultaneous truth and performance level estimation method. All observer contours then were compared with the reference contour to calculate the Dice coefficient, Hausdorff distance, and mean contour distance (prostate contour only). Qualitative image quality analysis was performed using a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (much superior image quality for Iterative_CBCT) to 5 (much inferior image quality for Iterative_CBCT). RESULTS: The Iterative_CBCT data sets resulted in a prostate contour Dice coefficient improvement of approximately 2.4% (P = .029). The average prostate contour Dice coefficient for the Iterative_CBCT data sets was improved for all patients, with improvements up to approximately 10% for 1 patient. The mean contour distance results indicate an approximate 15% reduction in mean contouring error for all prostate regions. For the parotid contours, Iterative_CBCT data sets resulted in a Hausdorff distance improvement of approximately 2 mm (P < .01) and an approximate 2% improvement in Dice coefficient (P = .03). The Iterative_CBCT data sets were scored as equivalent or of better image quality for 97.3% (prostate) and 90.0% (HN) of the patient data sets. CONCLUSIONS: Observers noted an improvement in image uniformity, noise level, and overall image quality for Iterative_CBCT data sets. In addition, expert observers displayed an improved ability to consistently delineate soft tissue structures, such as the prostate and parotid glands. Thus, the novel iterative reconstruction algorithm analyzed in this study is capable of improving the visualization for prostate and HN cancer image guided radiation therapy. Elsevier 2019-01-10 /pmc/articles/PMC6460237/ /pubmed/31011685 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2018.12.003 Text en © 2019 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Physics Contribution
Gardner, Stephen J.
Mao, Weihua
Liu, Chang
Aref, Ibrahim
Elshaikh, Mohamed
Lee, Joon K.
Pradhan, Deepak
Movsas, Benjamin
Chetty, Indrin J.
Siddiqui, Farzan
Improvements in CBCT Image Quality Using a Novel Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm: A Clinical Evaluation
title Improvements in CBCT Image Quality Using a Novel Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm: A Clinical Evaluation
title_full Improvements in CBCT Image Quality Using a Novel Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm: A Clinical Evaluation
title_fullStr Improvements in CBCT Image Quality Using a Novel Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm: A Clinical Evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Improvements in CBCT Image Quality Using a Novel Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm: A Clinical Evaluation
title_short Improvements in CBCT Image Quality Using a Novel Iterative Reconstruction Algorithm: A Clinical Evaluation
title_sort improvements in cbct image quality using a novel iterative reconstruction algorithm: a clinical evaluation
topic Physics Contribution
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6460237/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31011685
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.adro.2018.12.003
work_keys_str_mv AT gardnerstephenj improvementsincbctimagequalityusinganoveliterativereconstructionalgorithmaclinicalevaluation
AT maoweihua improvementsincbctimagequalityusinganoveliterativereconstructionalgorithmaclinicalevaluation
AT liuchang improvementsincbctimagequalityusinganoveliterativereconstructionalgorithmaclinicalevaluation
AT arefibrahim improvementsincbctimagequalityusinganoveliterativereconstructionalgorithmaclinicalevaluation
AT elshaikhmohamed improvementsincbctimagequalityusinganoveliterativereconstructionalgorithmaclinicalevaluation
AT leejoonk improvementsincbctimagequalityusinganoveliterativereconstructionalgorithmaclinicalevaluation
AT pradhandeepak improvementsincbctimagequalityusinganoveliterativereconstructionalgorithmaclinicalevaluation
AT movsasbenjamin improvementsincbctimagequalityusinganoveliterativereconstructionalgorithmaclinicalevaluation
AT chettyindrinj improvementsincbctimagequalityusinganoveliterativereconstructionalgorithmaclinicalevaluation
AT siddiquifarzan improvementsincbctimagequalityusinganoveliterativereconstructionalgorithmaclinicalevaluation