Evaluation of a new transperineal ultrasound probe for inter-fraction image-guidance for definitive and post-operative prostate cancer radiotherapy.

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to evaluate a new system based on transperineal ultrasound (TP-US) acquisitions for prostate and post-prostatectomy pre-treatment positioning by comparing this device to cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). METHODS The differences between CBCT/CT and TP-US/TP-US registrations were analyzed on 427 and 453 sessions for 13 prostate and 14 post-prostatectomy patients, respectively. The inter-operator variability (IOV) of the registration process, and the impact and variability of the probe pressure were also evaluated. RESULTS CBCT and TP-US shift agreements at ± 5 mm were 76.6%, 95.1%, 96.3% and 90.3%, 85.0%, 97.6% in anterior-posterior, superior-inferior and left-right directions, for prostate and post-prostatectomy patients, respectively. IOV values were similar between the 2 modalities. Displacements above 5 mm due to strong pressures were observed on both localizations, but such pressures were rarely reproduced during treatment courses. CONCLUSIONS High concordance between CBCT/CT and TP-US/TP-US localization of prostates or prostatic beds was found in this study. TP-US based prepositioning is a feasible method to ensure accurate treatment delivery, and represents an attractive alternative to invasive and/or irradiating imaging modalities.

[1]  Davide Fontanarosa,et al.  Critical assessment of intramodality 3D ultrasound imaging for prostate IGRT compared to fiducial markers. , 2013, Medical physics.

[2]  J. Wong,et al.  Flat-panel cone-beam computed tomography for image-guided radiation therapy. , 2002, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[3]  Alexander Markovic,et al.  Quality assurance of U.S.-guided external beam radiotherapy for prostate cancer: report of AAPM Task Group 154. , 2011, Medical physics.

[4]  Simon Rit,et al.  Semiautomatic registration of 3D transabdominal ultrasound images for patient repositioning during postprostatectomy radiotherapy. , 2014, Medical physics.

[5]  S. Rit,et al.  Ultrasound versus Cone-beam CT image-guided radiotherapy for prostate and post-prostatectomy pretreatment localization. , 2015, Physica medica : PM : an international journal devoted to the applications of physics to medicine and biology : official journal of the Italian Association of Biomedical Physics.

[6]  Wendy L. Smith,et al.  Prostate volume contouring: a 3D analysis of segmentation using 3DTRUS, CT, and MR. , 2007, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[7]  Franca Foppiano,et al.  Rectal and bladder motion during conformal radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. , 2005, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[8]  I. Chetty,et al.  Evaluation of multiple image-based modalities for image-guided radiation therapy (IGRT) of prostate carcinoma: a prospective study. , 2013, Medical physics.

[9]  M. Lachaine,et al.  INTRAFRACTIONAL PROSTATE MOTION MANAGEMENT WITH THE CLARITY AUTOSCAN SYSTEM , 2013 .

[10]  Clifton D Fuller,et al.  Comparison of ultrasound and implanted seed marker prostate localization methods: Implications for image-guided radiotherapy. , 2006, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  Diana Handrahan,et al.  Image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) for prostate cancer comparing kV imaging of fiducial markers with cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). , 2009, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[12]  T. Kron,et al.  Conventional margins not sufficient for post-prostatectomy prostate bed coverage: an analysis of 477 cone-beam computed tomography scans. , 2014, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[13]  Michel Bolla,et al.  Guidelines for target volume definition in post-operative radiotherapy for prostate cancer, on behalf of the EORTC Radiation Oncology Group. , 2007, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[14]  Simon Rit,et al.  Impact of probe pressure variability on prostate localization for ultrasound-based image-guided radiotherapy. , 2014, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[15]  Davide Fontanarosa,et al.  Review of ultrasound image guidance in external beam radiotherapy: I. Treatment planning and inter-fraction motion management , 2015, Physics in medicine and biology.

[16]  Frank Verhaegen,et al.  Ultrasound-based image guided radiotherapy for prostate cancer: comparison of cross-modality and intramodality methods for daily localization during external beam radiotherapy. , 2006, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[17]  Jürgen Hesser,et al.  Accuracy of ultrasound-based (BAT) prostate-repositioning: a three-dimensional on-line fiducial-based assessment with cone-beam computed tomography. , 2008, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[18]  T. Rosewall,et al.  Comparison of localization performance with implanted fiducial markers and cone-beam computed tomography for on-line image-guided radiotherapy of the prostate. , 2007, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[19]  W Beckham,et al.  3D ultrasound for prostate localization in radiation therapy: a comparison with implanted fiducial markers. , 2008, Medical physics.

[20]  Tomas Kron,et al.  Plan of the day selection for online image-guided adaptive post-prostatectomy radiotherapy. , 2013, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[21]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[22]  F. Verhaegen,et al.  On the significance of density-induced speed of sound variations on US-guided radiotherapy. , 2012, Medical physics.