Suppr超能文献

锥形束计算机断层扫描配准到最大和平均强度投影时的差异的体模和临床研究。

Phantom and clinical study of differences in cone beam computed tomographic registration when aligned to maximum and average intensity projection.

机构信息

Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases, Osaka, Japan.

Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases, Osaka, Japan.

出版信息

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014 Jan 1;88(1):189-94. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.09.031.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To determine whether maximum or average intensity projection (MIP or AIP, respectively) reconstructed from 4-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) is preferred for alignment to cone beam CT (CBCT) images in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Stationary CT and 4DCT images were acquired with a target phantom at the center of motion and moving along the superior-inferior (SI) direction, respectively. Motion profiles were asymmetrical waveforms with amplitudes of 10, 15, and 20 mm and a 4-second cycle. Stationary CBCT and dynamic CBCT images were acquired in the same manner as stationary CT and 4DCT images. Stationary CBCT was aligned to stationary CT, and the couch position was used as the baseline. Dynamic CBCT was aligned to the MIP and AIP of corresponding amplitudes. Registration error was defined as the SI deviation of the couch position from the baseline. In 16 patients with isolated lung lesions, free-breathing CBCT (FBCBCT) was registered to AIP and MIP (64 sessions in total), and the difference in couch shifts was calculated.

RESULTS

In the phantom study, registration errors were within 0.1 mm for AIP and 1.5 to 1.8 mm toward the inferior direction for MIP. In the patient study, the difference in the couch shifts (mean, range) was insignificant in the right-left (0.0 mm, ≤1.0 mm) and anterior-posterior (0.0 mm, ≤2.1 mm) directions. In the SI direction, however, the couch position significantly shifted in the inferior direction after MIP registration compared with after AIP registration (mean, -0.6 mm; ranging 1.7 mm to the superior side and 3.5 mm to the inferior side, P=.02).

CONCLUSIONS

AIP is recommended as the reference image for registration to FBCBCT when target alignment is performed in the presence of asymmetrical respiratory motion, whereas MIP causes systematic target positioning error.

摘要

目的

确定在肺部立体定向体部放射治疗中,对于与锥形束 CT(CBCT)图像的配准,使用最大强度投影(MIP)或平均强度投影(AIP)进行重建,哪种方法更优。

方法和材料

在运动的中心和沿上下(SI)方向分别放置目标体模,获取静止 CT 和 4DCT 图像。运动曲线为非对称波形,幅度为 10、15 和 20mm,周期为 4 秒。以与静止 CT 和 4DCT 图像相同的方式获取静止 CBCT 和动态 CBCT 图像。静止 CBCT 与静止 CT 配准,将治疗床位置用作基线。动态 CBCT 与相应幅度的 MIP 和 AIP 配准。注册误差定义为治疗床位置与基线的 SI 偏差。在 16 例孤立性肺部病变的患者中,对自由呼吸 CBCT(FBCBCT)进行了 AIP 和 MIP 配准(共 64 次),并计算了治疗床移动的差异。

结果

在体模研究中,AIP 的注册误差在 0.1mm 以内,MIP 则向下方偏差 1.5 至 1.8mm。在患者研究中,左右方向(0.0mm,≤1.0mm)和前后方向(0.0mm,≤2.1mm)的治疗床移动差异不显著。然而,在 SI 方向上,与 AIP 注册后相比,MIP 注册后治疗床位置明显向下方移动(平均,-0.6mm;范围从上方侧的 1.7mm 到下方侧的 3.5mm,P=0.02)。

结论

在存在非对称呼吸运动时进行靶区配准,建议使用 AIP 作为参考图像进行与 FBCBCT 的配准,而 MIP 会导致靶区定位的系统误差。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验