skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: SU-F-I-51: CT/MR Image Deformation: The Clinical Assessment QA in Target Delineation

Abstract

Purpose: To study the deformation effects in CT/MR image registration of head and neck (HN) cancers. We present a clinical indication in guiding and simplifying registration procedures of this process while CT images possessed artifacts. Methods: CT/MR image fusion provides better soft tissue contrast in intracranial GTV definition with artifacts. However, whether the fusion process should include the deformation process is questionable and not recommended. We performed CT/MR image registration of a HN patient with tonsil GTV and nodes delineation on Varian Velocity™ system. Both rigid transformation and deformable registration of the same CT/MR imaging data were processed separately. Physician’s selection of target delineation was implemented to identify the variations. Transformation matrix was shown with visual identification, as well as the deformation QA numbers and figures were assessed. Results: The deformable CT/MR images were traced with the calculated matrix, both translation and rotational parameters were summarized. In deformable quality QA, the calculated Jacobian matrix was analyzed, which the min/mean/max of 0.73/0/99/1.37, respectively. Jacobian matrix of right neck node was 0.84/1.13/1.41, which present dis-similarity of the nodal area. If Jacobian = 1, the deformation is at the optimum situation. In this case, the deformation results have shown better target delineation formore » CT/MR deformation than rigid transformation. Though the root-mean-square vector difference is 1.48 mm, with similar rotational components, the cord and vertebrae position were aligned much better in the deformable MR images than the rigid transformation. Conclusion: CT/MR with/without image deformation presents similar image registration matrix; there were significant differentiate the anatomical structures in the region of interest by deformable process. Though vendor suggested only rigid transformation between CT/MR assuming the geometry remain similar, our findings indicated with patient positional variations, deformation registration is needed to generate proper GTV coverage, which will be irradiated more accurately in the following boost phase.« less

Authors:
;  [1]
  1. Monmouth Medical Center, Long Branch, NJ (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22626807
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; ANIMAL TISSUES; BIOMEDICAL RADIOGRAPHY; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; HEAD; IMAGE PROCESSING; IMAGES; IRRADIATION; LYMPHATIC SYSTEM; NECK; NEOPLASMS; PATIENTS; PHARYNX; VERTEBRAE

Citation Formats

Yang, C, and Chen, Y. SU-F-I-51: CT/MR Image Deformation: The Clinical Assessment QA in Target Delineation. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4955879.
Yang, C, & Chen, Y. SU-F-I-51: CT/MR Image Deformation: The Clinical Assessment QA in Target Delineation. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4955879.
Yang, C, and Chen, Y. Wed . "SU-F-I-51: CT/MR Image Deformation: The Clinical Assessment QA in Target Delineation". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4955879.
@article{osti_22626807,
title = {SU-F-I-51: CT/MR Image Deformation: The Clinical Assessment QA in Target Delineation},
author = {Yang, C and Chen, Y},
abstractNote = {Purpose: To study the deformation effects in CT/MR image registration of head and neck (HN) cancers. We present a clinical indication in guiding and simplifying registration procedures of this process while CT images possessed artifacts. Methods: CT/MR image fusion provides better soft tissue contrast in intracranial GTV definition with artifacts. However, whether the fusion process should include the deformation process is questionable and not recommended. We performed CT/MR image registration of a HN patient with tonsil GTV and nodes delineation on Varian Velocity™ system. Both rigid transformation and deformable registration of the same CT/MR imaging data were processed separately. Physician’s selection of target delineation was implemented to identify the variations. Transformation matrix was shown with visual identification, as well as the deformation QA numbers and figures were assessed. Results: The deformable CT/MR images were traced with the calculated matrix, both translation and rotational parameters were summarized. In deformable quality QA, the calculated Jacobian matrix was analyzed, which the min/mean/max of 0.73/0/99/1.37, respectively. Jacobian matrix of right neck node was 0.84/1.13/1.41, which present dis-similarity of the nodal area. If Jacobian = 1, the deformation is at the optimum situation. In this case, the deformation results have shown better target delineation for CT/MR deformation than rigid transformation. Though the root-mean-square vector difference is 1.48 mm, with similar rotational components, the cord and vertebrae position were aligned much better in the deformable MR images than the rigid transformation. Conclusion: CT/MR with/without image deformation presents similar image registration matrix; there were significant differentiate the anatomical structures in the region of interest by deformable process. Though vendor suggested only rigid transformation between CT/MR assuming the geometry remain similar, our findings indicated with patient positional variations, deformation registration is needed to generate proper GTV coverage, which will be irradiated more accurately in the following boost phase.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4955879},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016},
month = {Wed Jun 15 00:00:00 EDT 2016}
}
  • Purpose: The objective of this study is to verify and analyze the accuracy of a clinical deformable image registration (DIR) software. Methods: To test clinical DIR software qualitatively and quantitatively, we focused on lung radiotherapy and analyzed a single (Lung) patient CT scan. Artificial anatomical changes were applied to account for daily variations during the course of treatment including the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OAR). The primary CT (pCT) and the structure set (pST) was deformed with commercial tool (ImSimQA-Oncology Systems Limited) and after artificial deformation (dCT and dST) sent to another commercial tool (VelocityAI-Varian Medicalmore » Systems). In Velocity, the deformed CT and structures (dCT and dST) were inversely deformed back to original primary CT (dbpCT and dbpST). We compared the dbpST and pST structure sets using similarity metrics. Furthermore, a binary deformation field vector (BDF) was created and sent to ImSimQA software for comparison with known “ground truth” deformation vector fields (DVF). Results: An image similarity comparison was made by using “ground truth” DVF and “deformed output” BDF with an output of normalized “cross correlation (CC)” and “mutual information (MI)” in ImSimQA software. Results for the lung case were MI=0.66 and CC=0.99. The artificial structure deformation in both pST and dbpST was analyzed using DICE coefficient, mean distance to conformity (MDC) and deformation field error volume histogram (DFEVH) by comparing them before and after inverse deformation. We have noticed inadequate structure match for CTV, ITV and PTV due to close proximity of heart and overall affected by lung expansion. Conclusion: We have seen similarity between pCT and dbpCT but not so well between pST and dbpST, because of inadequate structure deformation in clinical DIR system. This system based quality assurance test will prepare us for adopting the guidelines of upcoming AAPM task group 132 protocol.« less
  • Objective: To create and compare consensus clinical target volume (CTV) contours for computed tomography (CT) and 3-Tesla (3-T) magnetic resonance (MR) image-based cervical-cancer brachytherapy. Methods and Materials: Twenty-three experts in gynecologic radiation oncology contoured the same 3 cervical cancer brachytherapy cases: 1 stage IIB near-complete response (CR) case with a tandem and ovoid, 1 stage IIB partial response (PR) case with tandem and ovoid with needles, and 1 stage IB2 CR case with a tandem and ring applicator. The CT contours were completed before the MRI contours. These were analyzed for consistency and clarity of target delineation using an expectationmore » maximization algorithm for simultaneous truth and performance level estimation (STAPLE), with κ statistics as a measure of agreement between participants. The conformity index was calculated for each of the 6 data sets. Dice coefficients were generated to compare the CT and MR contours of the same case. Results: For all 3 cases, the mean tumor volume was smaller on MR than on CT (P<.001). The κ and conformity index estimates were slightly higher for CT, indicating a higher level of agreement on CT. The Dice coefficients were 89% for the stage IB2 case with a CR, 74% for the stage IIB case with a PR, and 57% for the stage IIB case with a CR. Conclusion: In a comparison of MR-contoured with CT-contoured CTV volumes, the higher level of agreement on CT may be due to the more distinct contrast medium visible on the images at the time of brachytherapy. MR at the time of brachytherapy may be of greatest benefit in patients with large tumors with parametrial extension that have a partial or complete response to external beam. On the basis of these results, a 95% consensus volume was generated for CT and for MR. Online contouring atlases are available for instruction at (http://www.nrgoncology.org/Resources/ContouringAtlases/GYNCervicalBrachytherapy.aspx)« less
  • Purpose: Validate the consistency of a gradient-based segmentation tool to facilitate accurate delineation of PET/CT-based GTVs in head and neck cancers by comparing against hybrid PET/MR-derived GTV contours. Materials and Methods: A total of 18 head and neck target volumes (10 primary and 8 nodal) were retrospectively contoured using a gradient-based segmentation tool by two observers. Each observer independently contoured each target five times. Inter-observer variability was evaluated via absolute percent differences. Intra-observer variability was examined by percentage uncertainty. All target volumes were also contoured using the SUV percent threshold method. The thresholds were explored case by case so itsmore » derived volume matched with the gradient-based volume. Dice similarity coefficients (DSC) were calculated to determine overlap of PET/CT GTVs and PET/MR GTVs. Results: The Levene’s test showed there was no statistically significant difference of the variances between the observer’s gradient-derived contours. However, the absolute difference between the observer’s volumes was 10.83%, with a range from 0.39% up to 42.89%. PET-avid regions with qualitatively non-uniform shapes and intensity levels had a higher absolute percent difference near 25%, while regions with uniform shapes and intensity levels had an absolute percent difference of 2% between observers. The average percentage uncertainty between observers was 4.83% and 7%. As the volume of the gradient-derived contours increased, the SUV threshold percent needed to match the volume decreased. Dice coefficients showed good agreement of the PET/CT and PET/MR GTVs with an average DSC value across all volumes at 0.69. Conclusion: Gradient-based segmentation of PET volume showed good consistency in general but can vary considerably for non-uniform target shapes and intensity levels. PET/CT-derived GTV contours stemming from the gradient-based tool show good agreement with the anatomically and metabolically more accurate PET/MR-derived GTV contours, but tumor delineation accuracy can be further improved with the use PET/MR.« less
  • Purpose: To develop and validate an automated technique for measuring image contrast in chest computed tomography (CT) exams. Methods: An automated computer algorithm was developed to measure the distribution of Hounsfield units (HUs) inside four major organs: the lungs, liver, aorta, and bones. These organs were first segmented or identified using computer vision and image processing techniques. Regions of interest (ROIs) were automatically placed inside the lungs, liver, and aorta and histograms of the HUs inside the ROIs were constructed. The mean and standard deviation of each histogram were computed for each CT dataset. Comparison of the mean and standardmore » deviation of the HUs in the different organs provides different contrast values. The ROI for the bones is simply the segmentation mask of the bones. Since the histogram for bones does not follow a Gaussian distribution, the 25th and 75th percentile were computed instead of the mean. The sensitivity and accuracy of the algorithm was investigated by comparing the automated measurements with manual measurements. Fifteen contrast enhanced and fifteen non-contrast enhanced chest CT clinical datasets were examined in the validation procedure. Results: The algorithm successfully measured the histograms of the four organs in both contrast and non-contrast enhanced chest CT exams. The automated measurements were in agreement with manual measurements. The algorithm has sufficient sensitivity as indicated by the near unity slope of the automated versus manual measurement plots. Furthermore, the algorithm has sufficient accuracy as indicated by the high coefficient of determination, R2, values ranging from 0.879 to 0.998. Conclusion: Patient-specific image contrast can be measured from clinical datasets. The algorithm can be run on both contrast enhanced and non-enhanced clinical datasets. The method can be applied to automatically assess the contrast characteristics of clinical chest CT images and quantify dependencies that may not be captured in phantom data.« less
  • Purpose: The use of Quantitative Imaging (QI) methods in Clinical Trials requires both verification of adherence to a specified protocol and an assessment of scanner performance under that protocol, which are currently accomplished manually. This work introduces automated phantom identification and image QA measure extraction towards a fully-automated CT phantom QA system to perform these functions and facilitate the use of Quantitative Imaging methods in clinical trials. Methods: This study used a retrospective cohort of CT phantom scans from existing clinical trial protocols - totaling 84 phantoms, across 3 phantom types using various scanners and protocols. The QA system identifiesmore » the input phantom scan through an ensemble of threshold-based classifiers. Each classifier - corresponding to a phantom type - contains a template slice, which is compared to the input scan on a slice-by-slice basis, resulting in slice-wise similarity metric values for each slice compared. Pre-trained thresholds (established from a training set of phantom images matching the template type) are used to filter the similarity distribution, and the slice with the most optimal local mean similarity, with local neighboring slices meeting the threshold requirement, is chosen as the classifier’s matched slice (if it existed). The classifier with the matched slice possessing the most optimal local mean similarity is then chosen as the ensemble’s best matching slice. If the best matching slice exists, image QA algorithm and ROIs corresponding to the matching classifier extracted the image QA measures. Results: Automated phantom identification performed with 84.5% accuracy and 88.8% sensitivity on 84 phantoms. Automated image quality measurements (following standard protocol) on identified water phantoms (n=35) matched user QA decisions with 100% accuracy. Conclusion: We provide a fullyautomated CT phantom QA system consistent with manual QA performance. Further work will include parallel component to automatically verify image acquisition parameters and automated adherence to specifications. Institutional research agreement, Siemens Healthcare; Past recipient, research grant support, Siemens Healthcare; Consultant, Toshiba America Medical Systems; Consultant, Samsung Electronics; NIH Grant support from: U01 CA181156.« less