Suppr超能文献

伽玛刀图标CBCT为基于框架的治疗提供了改进的定位工作流程。

Gamma Knife icon CBCT offers improved localization workflow for frame-based treatment.

作者信息

Duggar William N, Morris Bart, Fatemi Ali, Bonds Jemeria, He Rui, Kanakamedala Madhava, Rey-Dios Roberto, Vijayakumar Srinivasan, Yang Claus

机构信息

Radiation Oncology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA.

Radiology, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson, MS, USA.

出版信息

J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019 Nov;20(11):95-103. doi: 10.1002/acm2.12745. Epub 2019 Oct 6.

Abstract

OBJECT

The purpose of this study was to compare two methods of stereotactic localization in Gamma Knife treatment planning: cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) or fiducial. While the fiducial method is the traditional method of localization, CBCT is now available for use with the Gamma Knife Icon. This study seeks to determine whether a difference exists between the two methods and then whether one is better than the other regarding accuracy and workflow optimization.

METHODS

Cone beam computed tomography was used to define stereotactic space around the Elekta Film Pinprick phantom and then treated with film in place. The same phantom was offset known amounts from center and then imaged with CBCT and registered with the reference CBCT image to determine if measured offsets matched those known. Ten frameless and 10 frame-based magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to CBCT patient fusions were retrospectively evaluated using the TG-132 TRE method. The stereotactic coordinates defined by CBCT and traditional fiducials were compared on the Elekta 8 cm Ball phantom, an anthropomorphic phantom, and actual patient data. Offsets were introduced to the anthropomorphic phantom in the stereotactic frame and CBCT's ability to detect those offsets was determined.

RESULTS

Cone beam computed tomography defines stereotactic space well within the established limits of the mechanical alignment system. The CBCT to CBCT registration can detect offsets accurately to within 0.1 mm and 0.5°. In all cases, some disagreement existed between fiducial localization and that of CBCT which in some cases was small, but also was as high as 0.43 mm in the phantom domain and as much as 1.54 mm in actual patients.

CONCLUSION

Cone beam computed tomography demonstrates consistent accuracy in defining stereotactic space. Since both localization methods do not agree with each other consistently, the more reliable method must be identified. Cone beam computed tomography can accurately determine offsets occurring within stereotactic space that would be nondiscernible utilizing the fiducial method and seems to be more reliable. Using CBCT localization offers the opportunity to streamline workflow both from a patient and clinic perspective and also shows patient position immediately prior to treatment.

摘要

目的

本研究的目的是比较伽玛刀治疗计划中两种立体定向定位方法:锥形束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)或基准点法。虽然基准点法是传统的定位方法,但CBCT现在可用于伽玛刀Icon。本研究旨在确定这两种方法之间是否存在差异,以及在准确性和工作流程优化方面一种方法是否优于另一种方法。

方法

使用锥形束计算机断层扫描来定义Elekta薄膜针孔体模周围的立体定向空间,然后在薄膜就位的情况下进行治疗。将同一个体模从中心偏移已知量,然后用CBCT成像并与参考CBCT图像配准,以确定测量的偏移量是否与已知的偏移量匹配。使用TG-132 TRE方法对10例无框架和10例基于框架的磁共振成像(MRI)到CBCT的患者融合进行回顾性评估。在Elekta 8厘米球形体模、拟人化体模和实际患者数据上比较了CBCT和传统基准点定义的立体定向坐标。在立体定向框架中向拟人化体模引入偏移量,并确定CBCT检测这些偏移量的能力。

结果

锥形束计算机断层扫描在机械对准系统既定的限度内很好地定义了立体定向空间。CBCT到CBCT的配准能够准确检测到0.1毫米和0.5°以内的偏移量。在所有情况下,基准点定位与CBCT定位之间都存在一些差异,在某些情况下差异很小,但在体模区域差异高达0.43毫米,在实际患者中差异高达1.54毫米。

结论

锥形束计算机断层扫描在定义立体定向空间方面显示出一致的准确性。由于两种定位方法并不总是一致,必须确定更可靠的方法。锥形束计算机断层扫描可以准确确定立体定向空间内发生的偏移量,而使用基准点法无法察觉这些偏移量,并且似乎更可靠。使用CBCT定位为从患者和临床角度简化工作流程提供了机会,并且还能在治疗前立即显示患者的位置。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/678a/6839378/ed6e00422590/ACM2-20-95-g001.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验