Cargando…

How does CBCT reconstruction algorithm impact on deformably mapped targets and accumulated dose distributions?

PURPOSE: We performed quantitative analysis of differences in deformable image registration (DIR) and deformable dose accumulation (DDA) computed on CBCT datasets reconstructed using the standard (Feldkamp‐Davis‐Kress: FDK_CBCT) and a novel iterative (iterative_CBCT) CBCT reconstruction algorithms....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mao, Weihua, Liu, Chang, Gardner, Stephen J., Elshaikh, Mohamed, Aref, Ibrahim, Lee, Joon K., Pradhan, Deepak, Siddiqui, Farzan, Snyder, Karen Chin, Kumarasiri, Akila, Zhao, Bo, Kim, Joshua, Li, Haisen, Wen, Ning Winston, Movsas, Benjamin, Chetty, Indrin J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8425863/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34378308
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13328
_version_ 1783749927352926208
author Mao, Weihua
Liu, Chang
Gardner, Stephen J.
Elshaikh, Mohamed
Aref, Ibrahim
Lee, Joon K.
Pradhan, Deepak
Siddiqui, Farzan
Snyder, Karen Chin
Kumarasiri, Akila
Zhao, Bo
Kim, Joshua
Li, Haisen
Wen, Ning Winston
Movsas, Benjamin
Chetty, Indrin J.
author_facet Mao, Weihua
Liu, Chang
Gardner, Stephen J.
Elshaikh, Mohamed
Aref, Ibrahim
Lee, Joon K.
Pradhan, Deepak
Siddiqui, Farzan
Snyder, Karen Chin
Kumarasiri, Akila
Zhao, Bo
Kim, Joshua
Li, Haisen
Wen, Ning Winston
Movsas, Benjamin
Chetty, Indrin J.
author_sort Mao, Weihua
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: We performed quantitative analysis of differences in deformable image registration (DIR) and deformable dose accumulation (DDA) computed on CBCT datasets reconstructed using the standard (Feldkamp‐Davis‐Kress: FDK_CBCT) and a novel iterative (iterative_CBCT) CBCT reconstruction algorithms. METHODS: Both FDK_CBCT and iterative_CBCT images were reconstructed for 323 fractions of treatment for 10 prostate cancer patients. Planning CT images were deformably registered to each CBCT image data set. After daily dose distributions were computed, they were mapped to planning CT to obtain deformed doses. Dosimetric and image registration results based CBCT images reconstructed by two algorithms were compared at three levels: (A) voxel doses over entire dose calculation volume, (B) clinical constraint results on targets and sensitive structures, and (C) contours propagated to CBCT images using DIR results based on three algorithms (SmartAdapt, Velocity, and Elastix) were compared with manually delineated contours as ground truth. RESULTS: (A) Average daily dose differences and average normalized DDA differences between FDK_CBCT and iterative_CBCT were ≤1 cGy. Maximum daily point dose differences increased from 0.22 ± 0.06 Gy (before the deformable dose mapping operation) to 1.33 ± 0.38 Gy after the deformable dose mapping. Maximum differences of normalized DDA per fraction were up to 0.80 Gy (0.42 ± 0.19 Gy). (B) Differences in target minimum doses were up to 8.31 Gy (−0.62 ± 4.60 Gy) and differences in critical structure doses were 0.70 ± 1.49 Gy. (C) For mapped prostate contours based on iterative_CBCT (relative to standard FDK_CBCT), dice similarity coefficient increased by 0.10 ± 0.09 (p < 0.0001), mass center distances decreased by 2.5 ± 3.0 mm (p < 0.00005), and Hausdorff distances decreased by 3.3 ± 4.4 mm (p < 0.00015). CONCLUSIONS: The new iterative CBCT reconstruction algorithm leads to different mapped volumes of interest, deformed and cumulative doses than results based on conventional FDK_CBCT.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8425863
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84258632021-09-13 How does CBCT reconstruction algorithm impact on deformably mapped targets and accumulated dose distributions? Mao, Weihua Liu, Chang Gardner, Stephen J. Elshaikh, Mohamed Aref, Ibrahim Lee, Joon K. Pradhan, Deepak Siddiqui, Farzan Snyder, Karen Chin Kumarasiri, Akila Zhao, Bo Kim, Joshua Li, Haisen Wen, Ning Winston Movsas, Benjamin Chetty, Indrin J. J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE: We performed quantitative analysis of differences in deformable image registration (DIR) and deformable dose accumulation (DDA) computed on CBCT datasets reconstructed using the standard (Feldkamp‐Davis‐Kress: FDK_CBCT) and a novel iterative (iterative_CBCT) CBCT reconstruction algorithms. METHODS: Both FDK_CBCT and iterative_CBCT images were reconstructed for 323 fractions of treatment for 10 prostate cancer patients. Planning CT images were deformably registered to each CBCT image data set. After daily dose distributions were computed, they were mapped to planning CT to obtain deformed doses. Dosimetric and image registration results based CBCT images reconstructed by two algorithms were compared at three levels: (A) voxel doses over entire dose calculation volume, (B) clinical constraint results on targets and sensitive structures, and (C) contours propagated to CBCT images using DIR results based on three algorithms (SmartAdapt, Velocity, and Elastix) were compared with manually delineated contours as ground truth. RESULTS: (A) Average daily dose differences and average normalized DDA differences between FDK_CBCT and iterative_CBCT were ≤1 cGy. Maximum daily point dose differences increased from 0.22 ± 0.06 Gy (before the deformable dose mapping operation) to 1.33 ± 0.38 Gy after the deformable dose mapping. Maximum differences of normalized DDA per fraction were up to 0.80 Gy (0.42 ± 0.19 Gy). (B) Differences in target minimum doses were up to 8.31 Gy (−0.62 ± 4.60 Gy) and differences in critical structure doses were 0.70 ± 1.49 Gy. (C) For mapped prostate contours based on iterative_CBCT (relative to standard FDK_CBCT), dice similarity coefficient increased by 0.10 ± 0.09 (p < 0.0001), mass center distances decreased by 2.5 ± 3.0 mm (p < 0.00005), and Hausdorff distances decreased by 3.3 ± 4.4 mm (p < 0.00015). CONCLUSIONS: The new iterative CBCT reconstruction algorithm leads to different mapped volumes of interest, deformed and cumulative doses than results based on conventional FDK_CBCT. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-08-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8425863/ /pubmed/34378308 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13328 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://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
Mao, Weihua
Liu, Chang
Gardner, Stephen J.
Elshaikh, Mohamed
Aref, Ibrahim
Lee, Joon K.
Pradhan, Deepak
Siddiqui, Farzan
Snyder, Karen Chin
Kumarasiri, Akila
Zhao, Bo
Kim, Joshua
Li, Haisen
Wen, Ning Winston
Movsas, Benjamin
Chetty, Indrin J.
How does CBCT reconstruction algorithm impact on deformably mapped targets and accumulated dose distributions?
title How does CBCT reconstruction algorithm impact on deformably mapped targets and accumulated dose distributions?
title_full How does CBCT reconstruction algorithm impact on deformably mapped targets and accumulated dose distributions?
title_fullStr How does CBCT reconstruction algorithm impact on deformably mapped targets and accumulated dose distributions?
title_full_unstemmed How does CBCT reconstruction algorithm impact on deformably mapped targets and accumulated dose distributions?
title_short How does CBCT reconstruction algorithm impact on deformably mapped targets and accumulated dose distributions?
title_sort how does cbct reconstruction algorithm impact on deformably mapped targets and accumulated dose distributions?
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8425863/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34378308
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13328
work_keys_str_mv AT maoweihua howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT liuchang howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT gardnerstephenj howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT elshaikhmohamed howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT arefibrahim howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT leejoonk howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT pradhandeepak howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT siddiquifarzan howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT snyderkarenchin howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT kumarasiriakila howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT zhaobo howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT kimjoshua howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT lihaisen howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT wenningwinston howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT movsasbenjamin howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions
AT chettyindrinj howdoescbctreconstructionalgorithmimpactondeformablymappedtargetsandaccumulateddosedistributions