Cargando…
Quantifying the accuracy of deformable image registration for cone‐beam computed tomography with a physical phantom
PURPOSE: Kilo‐voltage cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) is widely used for patient alignment, contour propagation, and adaptive treatment planning in radiation therapy. In this study, we evaluated the accuracy of deformable image registration (DIR) for CBCT under various imaging protocols with di...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6806467/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31541526 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12717 |
_version_ | 1783461633686765568 |
---|---|
author | Wu, Richard Y. Liu, Amy Y. Williamson, Tyler D. Yang, Jinzhong Wisdom, Paul G. Zhu, Xiaorong R. Frank, Steven J. Fuller, Clifton D. Gunn, Gary B. Gao, Song |
author_facet | Wu, Richard Y. Liu, Amy Y. Williamson, Tyler D. Yang, Jinzhong Wisdom, Paul G. Zhu, Xiaorong R. Frank, Steven J. Fuller, Clifton D. Gunn, Gary B. Gao, Song |
author_sort | Wu, Richard Y. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Kilo‐voltage cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) is widely used for patient alignment, contour propagation, and adaptive treatment planning in radiation therapy. In this study, we evaluated the accuracy of deformable image registration (DIR) for CBCT under various imaging protocols with different noise and patient dose levels. METHODS: A physical phantom previously developed to facilitate end‐to‐end testing of the DIR accuracy was used with Varian Velocity v4.0 software to evaluate the performance of image registration from CT to CT, CBCT to CT, and CBCT to CBCT. The phantom is acrylic and includes several inserts that simulate different tissue shapes and properties. Deformations and anatomic changes were simulated by changing the rotations of both the phantom and the inserts. CT images (from a head and neck protocol) and CBCT images (from pelvis, head and “Image Gently” protocols) were obtained with different image noise and dose levels. Large inserts were filled with Mobil DTE oil to simulate soft tissue, and small inserts were filled with bone materials. All inserts were contoured before the DIR process to provide a ground truth contour size and shape for comparison. After the DIR process, all deformed contours were compared with the originals using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and mean distance to agreement (MDA). Both large and small volume of interests (VOIs) for DIR volume selection were tested by simulating a DIR process that included whole patient image volume and clinical target volumes (CTV) only (for CTVs propagation). RESULTS: For cross‐modality DIR registration (CT to CBCT), the DSC were >0.8 and the MDA were <3 mm for CBCT pelvis, and CBCT head protocols. For CBCT to CBCT and CT to CT, the DIR accuracy was improved relative to the cross‐modality tests. For smaller VOIs, the DSC were >0.8 and MDA <2 mm for all modalities. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of DIR depends on the quality of the CBCT image at different dose and noise levels. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6806467 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-68064672019-10-28 Quantifying the accuracy of deformable image registration for cone‐beam computed tomography with a physical phantom Wu, Richard Y. Liu, Amy Y. Williamson, Tyler D. Yang, Jinzhong Wisdom, Paul G. Zhu, Xiaorong R. Frank, Steven J. Fuller, Clifton D. Gunn, Gary B. Gao, Song J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE: Kilo‐voltage cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT) is widely used for patient alignment, contour propagation, and adaptive treatment planning in radiation therapy. In this study, we evaluated the accuracy of deformable image registration (DIR) for CBCT under various imaging protocols with different noise and patient dose levels. METHODS: A physical phantom previously developed to facilitate end‐to‐end testing of the DIR accuracy was used with Varian Velocity v4.0 software to evaluate the performance of image registration from CT to CT, CBCT to CT, and CBCT to CBCT. The phantom is acrylic and includes several inserts that simulate different tissue shapes and properties. Deformations and anatomic changes were simulated by changing the rotations of both the phantom and the inserts. CT images (from a head and neck protocol) and CBCT images (from pelvis, head and “Image Gently” protocols) were obtained with different image noise and dose levels. Large inserts were filled with Mobil DTE oil to simulate soft tissue, and small inserts were filled with bone materials. All inserts were contoured before the DIR process to provide a ground truth contour size and shape for comparison. After the DIR process, all deformed contours were compared with the originals using Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and mean distance to agreement (MDA). Both large and small volume of interests (VOIs) for DIR volume selection were tested by simulating a DIR process that included whole patient image volume and clinical target volumes (CTV) only (for CTVs propagation). RESULTS: For cross‐modality DIR registration (CT to CBCT), the DSC were >0.8 and the MDA were <3 mm for CBCT pelvis, and CBCT head protocols. For CBCT to CBCT and CT to CT, the DIR accuracy was improved relative to the cross‐modality tests. For smaller VOIs, the DSC were >0.8 and MDA <2 mm for all modalities. CONCLUSIONS: The accuracy of DIR depends on the quality of the CBCT image at different dose and noise levels. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-09-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6806467/ /pubmed/31541526 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12717 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Radiation Oncology Physics Wu, Richard Y. Liu, Amy Y. Williamson, Tyler D. Yang, Jinzhong Wisdom, Paul G. Zhu, Xiaorong R. Frank, Steven J. Fuller, Clifton D. Gunn, Gary B. Gao, Song Quantifying the accuracy of deformable image registration for cone‐beam computed tomography with a physical phantom |
title | Quantifying the accuracy of deformable image registration for cone‐beam computed tomography with a physical phantom |
title_full | Quantifying the accuracy of deformable image registration for cone‐beam computed tomography with a physical phantom |
title_fullStr | Quantifying the accuracy of deformable image registration for cone‐beam computed tomography with a physical phantom |
title_full_unstemmed | Quantifying the accuracy of deformable image registration for cone‐beam computed tomography with a physical phantom |
title_short | Quantifying the accuracy of deformable image registration for cone‐beam computed tomography with a physical phantom |
title_sort | quantifying the accuracy of deformable image registration for cone‐beam computed tomography with a physical phantom |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6806467/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31541526 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12717 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT wurichardy quantifyingtheaccuracyofdeformableimageregistrationforconebeamcomputedtomographywithaphysicalphantom AT liuamyy quantifyingtheaccuracyofdeformableimageregistrationforconebeamcomputedtomographywithaphysicalphantom AT williamsontylerd quantifyingtheaccuracyofdeformableimageregistrationforconebeamcomputedtomographywithaphysicalphantom AT yangjinzhong quantifyingtheaccuracyofdeformableimageregistrationforconebeamcomputedtomographywithaphysicalphantom AT wisdompaulg quantifyingtheaccuracyofdeformableimageregistrationforconebeamcomputedtomographywithaphysicalphantom AT zhuxiaorongr quantifyingtheaccuracyofdeformableimageregistrationforconebeamcomputedtomographywithaphysicalphantom AT frankstevenj quantifyingtheaccuracyofdeformableimageregistrationforconebeamcomputedtomographywithaphysicalphantom AT fullercliftond quantifyingtheaccuracyofdeformableimageregistrationforconebeamcomputedtomographywithaphysicalphantom AT gunngaryb quantifyingtheaccuracyofdeformableimageregistrationforconebeamcomputedtomographywithaphysicalphantom AT gaosong quantifyingtheaccuracyofdeformableimageregistrationforconebeamcomputedtomographywithaphysicalphantom |