Search

Purpose: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-only radiotherapy treatment planning requires accurate pseudo-CT (pCT) images for precise dose calculation. The current work introduced an atlas-based method combined with MR intensity information. pCT analyses and Monte Carlo dose calculations for intracranial stereotactic treatments were performed., Methods: Twenty-two patients, representing 35 tumor targets, were scanned using a 3D T1-weighted MRI sequence according to the clinical protocol. The MR atlas image was registered to the MR patient image using a deformable algorithm, and the deformation was then applied to the atlas CT. Two methods were applied. The first method (MRdef) was based on deformations only, while the second (MRint) also used the actual MR intensities. pCT analysis was performed using the mean (absolute) error, as well as an in-house tool based on a gamma index. Dose differences between pCT and true CT were analyzed using dose-volume histogram (DVH) parameters, statistical tests, the gamma index, and probability density functions. An unusual case, where the patient underwent an operation (part of the skull bone was removed), was studied in detail., Results: Soft tissues presented a mean error inferior to 50 HUs, while low-density tissues and bones presented discrepancies up to 600 HUs for hard bone. The MRdef method led to significant dose differences compared with the true CT (p-value < 0.05; Wilcoxon-signed-rank test). The MRint method performed better. The DVH parameter differences compared with CT were between -2.9% and 3.1%, except for two cases where the tumors were located within the sphenoid bone. For these cases, the dose errors were up to 6.6% and 5.4% (D 98 and D 95 ). Furthermore, for 85% of the tested patients, the mean dose to the planning target volume agreed within 2% with the calculation using the actual CT. Fictitious bone was generated in the unusual case using atlas-based methods., Conclusions: Generally, the atlas-based method led to acceptable dose distributions. The use of common T1 sequences allows the implementation of this method in clinical routine. However, unusual patient anatomy may produce large dose calculation errors. The detection of large anatomic discrepancies using MR image subtraction can be realized, but an alternative way to produce synthetic CT numbers in these regions is still required.

Purpose: Accurate delineation of organs at risk (OARs) on computed tomography (CT) image is required for radiation treatment planning (RTP). Manual delineation of OARs being time consuming and prone to high interobserver variability, many (semi-) automatic methods have been proposed. However, most of them are specific to a particular OAR. Here, an interactive computer-assisted system able to segment various OARs required for thoracic radiation therapy is introduced., Methods: Segmentation information (foreground and background seeds) is interactively added by the user in any of the three main orthogonal views of the CT volume and is subsequently propagated within the whole volume. The proposed method is based on the combination of watershed transformation and graph-cuts algorithm, which is used as a powerful optimization technique to minimize the energy function. The OARs considered for thoracic radiation therapy are the lungs, spinal cord, trachea, proximal bronchus tree, heart, and esophagus. The method was evaluated on multivendor CT datasets of 30 patients. Two radiation oncologists participated in the study and manual delineations from the original RTP were used as ground truth for evaluation., Results: Delineation of the OARs obtained with the minimally interactive approach was approved to be usable for RTP in nearly 90% of the cases, excluding the esophagus, which segmentation was mostly rejected, thus leading to a gain of time ranging from 50% to 80% in RTP. Considering exclusively accepted cases, overall OARs, a Dice similarity coefficient higher than 0.7 and a Hausdorff distance below 10 mm with respect to the ground truth were achieved. In addition, the interobserver analysis did not highlight any statistically significant difference, at the exception of the segmentation of the heart, in terms of Hausdorff distance and volume difference., Conclusions: An interactive, accurate, fast, and easy-to-use computer-assisted system able to segment various OARs required for thoracic radiation therapy has been presented and clinically evaluated. The introduction of the proposed system in clinical routine may offer valuable new option to radiation oncologists in performing RTP.