Department of Radiology, CHU de Bordeaux, CIC1401, 33000 Bordeaux, France.
Department of Radiology, CHU Vaudois, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Diagn Interv Imaging. 2021 Jan;102(1):45-52. doi: 10.1016/j.diii.2020.09.003. Epub 2020 Oct 5.
PURPOSE: To compare the reliability and accuracy of the pre-treatment dosimetry predictions using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) versus Tc-labeled macroaggregated albumin (MAA) SPECT/CT for perfused volume segmentation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated by selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) using Y-glass microspheres. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen patients (8 men, 7 women) with a mean age of 68.3±10.5 (SD) years (range: 47-82 years) who underwent a total of 17 SIRT procedures using Y-glass microspheres for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma were retrospectively included. Pre-treatment dosimetry data were calculated from Tc-MAA SPECT/CT using either CBCT or Tc-MAA SPECT/CT to segment the perfused volumes. Post-treatment dosimetry data were calculated using Y imaging (SPECT/CT or PET/CT). The whole liver, non-tumoral liver, and tumor volumes were segmented on CT or MRI data. The mean absorbed doses of the tumor (D), non-tumoral liver, perfused liver (D) and perfused non-tumoral liver were calculated. Intra- and interobserver reliabilities were investigated by calculating Lin's concordant correlation coefficients (ρ values). The differences (biases) between pre- and post-treatment dosimetry data were assessed using the modified Bland-Altman method (for non-normally distributed variables), and systematic bias was evaluated using Passing-Bablok regression. RESULTS: The intra- and interobserver reliabilities were good-to-excellent (ρ: 0.80-0.99) for all measures using both methods. Compared with 90Y imaging, the median differences were 5.8Gy (IQR: -12.7; 16.1) and 5.6Gy (IQR: -13.6; 10.2) for D-CBCT and D-Tc-MAA SPECT/CT, respectively. The median differences were 1.6Gy (IQR: -29; 7.53) and 9.8Gy (IQR: -28.4; 19.9) for D-CBCT and D-Tc-MAA SPECT/CT respectively. Passing-Bablok regression analysis showed that both CBCT and Tc-MAA SPECT/CT had proportional biases and thus tendencies to overestimate D and D at higher post-treatment doses. CONCLUSION: CBCT may be a reliable segmentation method, but it does not significantly increase the accuracy of dose prediction compared with that of Tc-MAA SPECT/CT. At higher doses both methods tend to overestimate the doses to tumors and perfused livers.
目的:比较使用锥形束 CT(CBCT)与 Tc 标记的巨聚合白蛋白(MAA)SPECT/CT 对接受 Y 玻璃微球选择性内部放射治疗(SIRT)治疗的肝细胞癌患者进行灌注体积分割的预处理剂量预测的可靠性和准确性。
材料与方法:回顾性纳入 15 例(8 男,7 女)年龄 68.3±10.5(SD)岁(范围:47-82 岁)的患者,共进行 17 例 Y 玻璃微球治疗不可切除肝细胞癌的 SIRT 治疗。使用 Tc-MAA SPECT/CT 计算 Tc-MAA SPECT/CT 计算的预处理剂量数据以分割灌注体积。使用 Y 成像(SPECT/CT 或 PET/CT)计算治疗后剂量数据。在 CT 或 MRI 数据上分割整个肝脏、非肿瘤性肝脏和肿瘤体积。计算肿瘤(D)、非肿瘤性肝脏、灌注肝脏(D)和灌注非肿瘤性肝脏的平均吸收剂量。通过计算 Lin 一致相关系数(ρ 值)来研究观察者内和观察者间的可靠性。使用修改后的 Bland-Altman 方法(用于非正态分布变量)评估预处理和治疗后剂量数据之间的差异(偏差),并使用 Passing-Bablok 回归评估系统偏差。
结果:两种方法的所有测量值的观察者内和观察者间可靠性均为良好至极好(ρ:0.80-0.99)。与 90Y 成像相比,D-CBCT 和 D-Tc-MAA SPECT/CT 的中位数差异分别为 5.8Gy(IQR:-12.7;16.1)和 5.6Gy(IQR:-13.6;10.2)。D-CBCT 和 D-Tc-MAA SPECT/CT 的中位数差异分别为 1.6Gy(IQR:-29;7.53)和 9.8Gy(IQR:-28.4;19.9)。Passing-Bablok 回归分析表明,CBCT 和 Tc-MAA SPECT/CT 均具有比例偏差,因此在较高的治疗后剂量下,存在高估 D 和 D 的趋势。
结论:CBCT 可能是一种可靠的分割方法,但与 Tc-MAA SPECT/CT 相比,它并没有显著提高剂量预测的准确性。在较高剂量下,两种方法都倾向于高估肿瘤和灌注肝脏的剂量。
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021-7
Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2020-4
Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2024-9-30
Res Diagn Interv Imaging. 2024-3-10
Cancers (Basel). 2023-5-8
Cancers (Basel). 2022-5-10