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

Title: SU-F-T-42: MRI and TRUS Image Fusion as a Mode of Generating More Accurate Prostate Contours

Abstract

Purpose: Transrectal Ultrasound (TRUS) imaging is utilized intra-operatively for LDR permanent prostate seed implant treatment planning. Prostate contouring with TRUS can be challenging at the apex and base. This study attempts to improve accuracy of prostate contouring with MRI-TRUS fusion to prevent over- or under-estimation of the prostate volume. Methods: 14 patients with previous MRI guided prostate biopsy and undergone an LDR permanent prostate seed implant have been selected. The prostate was contoured on the MRI images (1 mm slice thickness) by a radiologist. The prostate was also contoured on TRUS images (5 mm slice thickness) during LDR procedure by a urologist. MRI and TRUS images were rigidly fused manually and the prostate contours from MRI and TRUS were compared using Dice similarity coefficient, percentage volume difference and length, height and width differences. Results: The prostate volume was overestimated by 8 ± 18% (range: 34% to −25%) in TRUS images compared to MRI. The mean Dice was 0.77 ± 0.09 (range: 0.53 to 0.88). The mean difference (TRUS-MRI) in the prostate width was 0 ± 4 mm (range: −11 to 5 mm), height was −3 ± 6 mm (range: −13 to 6 mm) and length was 6 ± 6 (range:more » −10 to 16 mm). Prostate was overestimated with TRUS imaging at the base for 6 cases (mean: 8 ± 4 mm and range: 5 to 14 mm), at the apex for 6 cases (mean: 11 ± 3 mm and range: 5 to 15 mm) and 1 case was underestimated at both base and apex by 4 mm. Conclusion: Use of intra-operative TRUS and MRI image fusion can help to improve the accuracy of prostate contouring by accurately accounting for prostate over- or under-estimations, especially at the base and apex. The mean amount of discrepancy is within a range that is significant for LDR sources.« less

Authors:
; ; ; ; ;  [1]
  1. Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH (United States)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22642291
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; ACCURACY; BIOMEDICAL RADIOGRAPHY; BIOPSY; BRACHYTHERAPY; IMAGES; NMR IMAGING; PATIENTS; PLANNING; PROSTATE; RADIATION SOURCE IMPLANTS; THICKNESS

Citation Formats

Petronek, M, Purysko, A, Balik, S, Ciezki, J, Klein, E, and Wilkinson, D. SU-F-T-42: MRI and TRUS Image Fusion as a Mode of Generating More Accurate Prostate Contours. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4956177.
Petronek, M, Purysko, A, Balik, S, Ciezki, J, Klein, E, & Wilkinson, D. SU-F-T-42: MRI and TRUS Image Fusion as a Mode of Generating More Accurate Prostate Contours. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956177.
Petronek, M, Purysko, A, Balik, S, Ciezki, J, Klein, E, and Wilkinson, D. Wed . "SU-F-T-42: MRI and TRUS Image Fusion as a Mode of Generating More Accurate Prostate Contours". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4956177.
@article{osti_22642291,
title = {SU-F-T-42: MRI and TRUS Image Fusion as a Mode of Generating More Accurate Prostate Contours},
author = {Petronek, M and Purysko, A and Balik, S and Ciezki, J and Klein, E and Wilkinson, D},
abstractNote = {Purpose: Transrectal Ultrasound (TRUS) imaging is utilized intra-operatively for LDR permanent prostate seed implant treatment planning. Prostate contouring with TRUS can be challenging at the apex and base. This study attempts to improve accuracy of prostate contouring with MRI-TRUS fusion to prevent over- or under-estimation of the prostate volume. Methods: 14 patients with previous MRI guided prostate biopsy and undergone an LDR permanent prostate seed implant have been selected. The prostate was contoured on the MRI images (1 mm slice thickness) by a radiologist. The prostate was also contoured on TRUS images (5 mm slice thickness) during LDR procedure by a urologist. MRI and TRUS images were rigidly fused manually and the prostate contours from MRI and TRUS were compared using Dice similarity coefficient, percentage volume difference and length, height and width differences. Results: The prostate volume was overestimated by 8 ± 18% (range: 34% to −25%) in TRUS images compared to MRI. The mean Dice was 0.77 ± 0.09 (range: 0.53 to 0.88). The mean difference (TRUS-MRI) in the prostate width was 0 ± 4 mm (range: −11 to 5 mm), height was −3 ± 6 mm (range: −13 to 6 mm) and length was 6 ± 6 (range: −10 to 16 mm). Prostate was overestimated with TRUS imaging at the base for 6 cases (mean: 8 ± 4 mm and range: 5 to 14 mm), at the apex for 6 cases (mean: 11 ± 3 mm and range: 5 to 15 mm) and 1 case was underestimated at both base and apex by 4 mm. Conclusion: Use of intra-operative TRUS and MRI image fusion can help to improve the accuracy of prostate contouring by accurately accounting for prostate over- or under-estimations, especially at the base and apex. The mean amount of discrepancy is within a range that is significant for LDR sources.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4956177},
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}
}