Cargando…

Shift detection discrepancy between ExacTrac Dynamic system and cone‐beam computed tomography

Accurate detection of patient shift is essential during radiation therapy such that optimal dose is delivered to the tumor while minimizing radiation to surrounding normal tissues. The shift detectability of a newly developed optical surface and thermal tracking system, which was known as ExacTrac D...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chow, Vivian U. Y., Cheung, Michael L. M., Kan, Monica W. K., Chan, Anthony T. C.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9121052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35188333
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13567
_version_ 1784711072575389696
author Chow, Vivian U. Y.
Cheung, Michael L. M.
Kan, Monica W. K.
Chan, Anthony T. C.
author_facet Chow, Vivian U. Y.
Cheung, Michael L. M.
Kan, Monica W. K.
Chan, Anthony T. C.
author_sort Chow, Vivian U. Y.
collection PubMed
description Accurate detection of patient shift is essential during radiation therapy such that optimal dose is delivered to the tumor while minimizing radiation to surrounding normal tissues. The shift detectability of a newly developed optical surface and thermal tracking system, which was known as ExacTrac Dynamic (EXTD), was evaluated by comparing its performance with the image guidance under cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT). Anthropomorphic cranial and pelvis phantoms with internal bone‐like structures and external heat pad were utilized to study the shift detection discrepancy between EXTD system and CBCT. Random displacements within the range of ± 2 cm for translations and ± 2 degrees for rotations were intentionally applied to the phantom. Positional shifts detected by optical surface and thermal tracking (EXTD_Thml), stereoscopic X‐ray (EXTD_Xray), and CBCT were compared in 6 degrees of freedom. The translational difference between EXTD_Thml and CBCT was 0.57 ± 0.41 mm and 0.66 ± 0.40 mm for cranial and pelvis phantom, respectively, while it was 0.60 ± 0.43 mm and 0.76 ± 0.49 mm between EXTD_Xray and CBCT, respectively. For rotational movement, the difference between EXTD_Thml and CBCT was 0.19 ± 0.16° and 0.19 ± 0.22° for cranial and pelvis phantom, respectively, while it was 0.13 ± 0.18° and 0.65 ± 0.46° between EXTD_Xray and CBCT, respectively. This study demonstrated that the EXTD system with thermal mapping ability could offer comparable accuracy for shift detection with CBCT on both cranial and pelvis phantoms.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9121052
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91210522022-05-21 Shift detection discrepancy between ExacTrac Dynamic system and cone‐beam computed tomography Chow, Vivian U. Y. Cheung, Michael L. M. Kan, Monica W. K. Chan, Anthony T. C. J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics Accurate detection of patient shift is essential during radiation therapy such that optimal dose is delivered to the tumor while minimizing radiation to surrounding normal tissues. The shift detectability of a newly developed optical surface and thermal tracking system, which was known as ExacTrac Dynamic (EXTD), was evaluated by comparing its performance with the image guidance under cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT). Anthropomorphic cranial and pelvis phantoms with internal bone‐like structures and external heat pad were utilized to study the shift detection discrepancy between EXTD system and CBCT. Random displacements within the range of ± 2 cm for translations and ± 2 degrees for rotations were intentionally applied to the phantom. Positional shifts detected by optical surface and thermal tracking (EXTD_Thml), stereoscopic X‐ray (EXTD_Xray), and CBCT were compared in 6 degrees of freedom. The translational difference between EXTD_Thml and CBCT was 0.57 ± 0.41 mm and 0.66 ± 0.40 mm for cranial and pelvis phantom, respectively, while it was 0.60 ± 0.43 mm and 0.76 ± 0.49 mm between EXTD_Xray and CBCT, respectively. For rotational movement, the difference between EXTD_Thml and CBCT was 0.19 ± 0.16° and 0.19 ± 0.22° for cranial and pelvis phantom, respectively, while it was 0.13 ± 0.18° and 0.65 ± 0.46° between EXTD_Xray and CBCT, respectively. This study demonstrated that the EXTD system with thermal mapping ability could offer comparable accuracy for shift detection with CBCT on both cranial and pelvis phantoms. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-02-21 /pmc/articles/PMC9121052/ /pubmed/35188333 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13567 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The 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
Chow, Vivian U. Y.
Cheung, Michael L. M.
Kan, Monica W. K.
Chan, Anthony T. C.
Shift detection discrepancy between ExacTrac Dynamic system and cone‐beam computed tomography
title Shift detection discrepancy between ExacTrac Dynamic system and cone‐beam computed tomography
title_full Shift detection discrepancy between ExacTrac Dynamic system and cone‐beam computed tomography
title_fullStr Shift detection discrepancy between ExacTrac Dynamic system and cone‐beam computed tomography
title_full_unstemmed Shift detection discrepancy between ExacTrac Dynamic system and cone‐beam computed tomography
title_short Shift detection discrepancy between ExacTrac Dynamic system and cone‐beam computed tomography
title_sort shift detection discrepancy between exactrac dynamic system and cone‐beam computed tomography
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9121052/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35188333
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13567
work_keys_str_mv AT chowvivianuy shiftdetectiondiscrepancybetweenexactracdynamicsystemandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT cheungmichaellm shiftdetectiondiscrepancybetweenexactracdynamicsystemandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT kanmonicawk shiftdetectiondiscrepancybetweenexactracdynamicsystemandconebeamcomputedtomography
AT chananthonytc shiftdetectiondiscrepancybetweenexactracdynamicsystemandconebeamcomputedtomography