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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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