首页> 外文期刊>Journal of Medical Physics/Association of Medical Physicists of India >Study to Compare the Effect of Different Registration Methods on Patient Setup Uncertainties in Cone-beam Computed Tomography during Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Breast Cancer Patients
【24h】

Study to Compare the Effect of Different Registration Methods on Patient Setup Uncertainties in Cone-beam Computed Tomography during Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy for Breast Cancer Patients

机译:在乳腺癌患者的容积调制电弧治疗期间,比较不同配准方法对锥形束计算机断层扫描中患者设置不确定性影响的比较研究

获取原文
       

摘要

Purpose: This study compared three different methods used in registering cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) image set with planning CT image set for determining patient setup uncertainties during volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for breast cancer patients. Materials and Methods: Seven breast cancer patients treated with 50 Gy in 25 fractions using VMAT technique were chosen for this study. A total of 105 CBCT scans were acquired by image guidance protocol for patient setup verification. Approved plans’ CT images were used as the reference image sets for registration with their corresponding CBCT image sets. Setup errors in mediolateral, craniocaudal, and anteroposterior direction were determined using gray-scale matching between the reference CT images and onboard CBCT images. Patient setup verification was performed using clip-box registration (CBR) method during online imaging. Considering the CBR method as the reference, two more registrations were performed using mask registration (MR) method and dual registration (DR) (CBR + MR) method in the offline mode. For comparison, systematic error (∑), random error (σ), mean displacement vector ( R ), mean setup error ( M ), and registration time ( R t) were analyzed. Post hoc Tukey's honest significant difference test was performed for multiple comparisons. Results: Systematic and random errors were less in CBR as compared to MR and DR ( P 0.05). The mean displacement error and mean setup errors were less in CBR as compared to MR and DR ( P 0.05). Increased R t was observed in DR as compared to CBR and MR ( P 0.05). Conclusion: For breast VMAT plan delivery, all three registration methods show insignificant variation in patient setup error. One can use any of the three registration methods for patient setup verification.
机译:目的:本研究比较了三种用于注册锥束计算机断层扫描(CBCT)图像集和计划CT图像集的方法,这些方法用于确定乳腺癌患者的容积调制弧光治疗(VMAT)期间患者设置的不确定性。材料和方法:本研究选择了7名使用VMAT技术按25份剂量接受50 Gy治疗的乳腺癌患者。通过图像引导协议总共进行了105次CBCT扫描,用于患者设置验证。将批准的计划的CT图像用作参考图像集,以与它们对应的CBCT图像集配准。使用参考CT图像和机载CBCT图像之间的灰度匹配来确定前外侧,颅尾和前后方向的设置误差。在在线成像过程中,使用剪辑盒配准(CBR)方法执行了患者设置验证。以CBR方法为参考,在脱机模式下使用掩码注册(MR)方法和双重注册(DR)(CBR + MR)方法进行了两次注册。为了进行比较,分析了系统误差(∑),随机误差(σ),平均位移矢量(R),平均设置误差(M)和配准时间(R t)。图基(Tukey)进行了诚实的重大差异测试,以进行多次比较。结果:与MR和DR相比,CBR的系统性错误和随机性错误更少(P> 0.05)。与MR和DR相比,CBR中的平均位移误差和平均设置误差较小(P> 0.05)。与CBR和MR相比,DR的R t增加(P 0.05)。结论:对于乳房VMAT计划交付,所有三种注册方法均显示患者设置错误无明显变化。一个可以使用三种注册方法中的任何一种进行患者设置验证。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号