Evaluation of methods for selecting the midventilation bin in 4DCT scans of lung cancer patients

Authors

  • Ditte Eklund Nygaard Department of Radiation Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Gitte Fredberg Persson Department of Radiation Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Carsten Brink Laboratory of Radiation Physics, Odense University Hospital, Denmark; Institute of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
  • Lena Specht Department of Radiation Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark; Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Stine Sofia Korreman Department of Radiation Oncology, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Denmark; Department of Science, Systems and Models, Roskilde University, Denmark; Faculty of Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2012.762993

Abstract

Background. In lung cancer radiotherapy, planning on the midventilation (MidV) bin of a four-dimensional (4D) CT scan can reduce the systematic errors introduced by respiratory tumour motion compared to conventional CT. In this study four different methods for MidV bin selection are evaluated. Material and methods. The study is based on 4DCT scans of 19 patients with a total of 23 peripheral lung tumours having peak-to-peak displacement ≥ 5 mm in at least one of the left-right (LR), anterior-posterior (AP) or cranio-caudal (CC) directions. For each tumour, the MidV bin was selected based on: 1) visual evaluation of tumour displacement; 2) rigid registration of tumour position; 3) diaphragm displacement in the CC direction; and 4) carina displacement in the CC direction. Determination of the MidV bin based on the displacement of the manually delineated gross tumour volume (GTV) was used as a reference method. The accuracy of each method was evaluated by the distance between GTV position in the selected MidV bin and the time-weighted mean position of GTV throughout the bins (i.e. the geometric MidV error). Results. Median (range) geometric MidV error was 1.4 (0.4–5.4) mm, 1.4 (0.4–5.4) mm, 1.9 (0.5–6.9) mm, 2.0 (0.5–12.3) mm and 1.1 (0.4–5.4) mm for the visual, rigid registration, diaphragm, carina, and reference method. Median (range) absolute difference between geometric MidV error for the evaluated methods and the reference method was 0.0 (0.0–1.2) mm, 0.0 (0.0–1.7) mm, 0.7 (0.0–3.9) mm and 1.0 (0.0–6.9) mm for the visual, rigid registration, diaphragm and carina method. Conclusion. The visual and semi-automatic rigid registration methods were equivalent in accuracy for selecting the MidV bin of a 4DCT scan. The methods based on diaphragm and carina displacement cannot be recommended without modifications.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2013-11-01

How to Cite

Eklund Nygaard, D., Fredberg Persson, G., Brink, C., Specht, L., & Sofia Korreman, S. (2013). Evaluation of methods for selecting the midventilation bin in 4DCT scans of lung cancer patients. Acta Oncologica, 52(8), 1715–1722. https://doi.org/10.3109/0284186X.2012.762993