Interactive three dimensional inspection of patient setup in radiation therapy using digital portal images and computed tomography data.

PURPOSE Presently, the majority of clinical tools to quantify deviations in patient setup during external beam radiotherapy is based on two-dimensional (2D) analysis of portal images. The purpose of this study is to develop a tool for the inspection of the patient setup in three dimensions (3D) and to validate its clinical advantage over methods based on 2D analysis in the presence of out-of-plane rotations. METHODS AND MATERIALS We developed an interactive procedure to quantify the setup deviation of the patient in 3D. The procedure is based on fast computation of digitally reconstructed radiographs (DRRs) in two beam directions and comparison of these DRRs with corresponding portal images. The potential of the tool is demonstrated on three selected cases of prostate and parotid gland treatment where conventional 2D analysis produced inconsistent results. The measurements from 3D analysis are compared with those obtained from the 2D analysis. RESULTS Despite application of an immobilization cast, two investigated parotid gland setups showed rotational deviations in 3D up to 3 degrees. Two-dimensional analysis of these deviations produced inconsistent results. Analysis of the selected prostate setup in 3D showed a rotational deviation of 7 degrees around the left-right axis, possibly causing displacement of the seminal vesicles toward the borders of the conformal boost fields. Using 2D analysis, this out-of-plane rotation was misinterpreted as a translation resulting in the failure to trigger the decision protocol to correct the setup after the first fraction. Using the 3D patient setup analysis procedure, an accuracy of the order of 1 mm and 1 degree (SD) could be obtained. The computation time of the interactive DRRs is of the order of 1 s on a 60 MHz PC. The complete interactive 3D analysis requires about 10 min. CONCLUSIONS Quantification of the patient setup in 3D provides essential additional information in cases where conventional 2D analysis is inconsistent, e.g., in the presence of out-of-plane rotations or geometrical degeneracies. The speed and accuracy of the interactive 3D patient setup inspection are acceptable for use in offline clinical studies and analysis of problem cases.

[1]  L. Verhey,et al.  Computer-assisted positioning of radiotherapy patients using implanted radiopaque fiducials. , 1993, Medical physics.

[2]  R L Siddon,et al.  Solution to treatment planning problems using coordinate transformations. , 1981, Medical physics.

[3]  G J Kutcher,et al.  The effect of setup uncertainties on the treatment of nasopharynx cancer. , 1993, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  M van Herk,et al.  A matrix ionisation chamber imaging device for on-line patient setup verification during radiotherapy. , 1988, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[5]  M. Goitein,et al.  Multi-dimensional treatment planning: II. Beam's eye-view, back projection, and projection through CT sections. , 1983, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[6]  G E Hanks,et al.  Patterns of care study: Hodgkin's disease relapse rates and adequacy of portals , 1983, Cancer.

[7]  M van Herk,et al.  Automatic three-dimensional inspection of patient setup in radiation therapy using portal images, simulator images, and computed tomography data. , 1996, Medical physics.

[8]  H. Kooy,et al.  Automatic three-dimensional correlation of CT-CT, CT-MRI, and CT-SPECT using chamfer matching. , 1994, Medical physics.

[9]  M van Herk,et al.  Radiation field edge detection in portal images. , 1991, Physics in medicine and biology.

[10]  A L Boyer,et al.  An image correlation procedure for digitally reconstructed radiographs and electronic portal images. , 1995, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  M van Herk,et al.  Automatic on-line inspection of patient setup in radiation therapy using digital portal images. , 1993, Medical physics.

[12]  R E Vijlbrief,et al.  Transfer errors of planning CT to simulator: a possible source of setup inaccuracies? , 1994, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[13]  M van Herk,et al.  Quantification of organ motion during conformal radiotherapy of the prostate by three dimensional image registration. , 1995, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[14]  G T Chen,et al.  Correlation of projection radiographs in radiation therapy using open curve segments and points. , 1992, Medical physics.

[15]  R E Vijlbrief,et al.  Setup deviations in wedged pair irradiation of parotid gland and tonsillar tumors, measured with an electronic portal imaging device. , 1995, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[16]  J Bijhold,et al.  Three-dimensional verification of patient placement during radiotherapy using portal images. , 1993, Medical physics.

[17]  J Moseley,et al.  A semiautomatic method for registration of portal images. , 1994, Medical physics.

[18]  G W Sherouse,et al.  Computation of digitally reconstructed radiographs for use in radiotherapy treatment design. , 1990, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[19]  R L Siddon,et al.  Calculation of the radiological depth. , 1985, Medical physics.

[20]  A G Haus,et al.  Localization error in the radiotherapy of Hodgkin's disease and malignant lymphoma with extended mantle fields , 1974, Cancer.

[21]  E Grusell,et al.  Patient positioning for fractionated precision radiation treatment of targets in the head using fiducial markers. , 1994, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[22]  J. Lebesque,et al.  The simultaneous boost technique: the concept of relative normalized total dose. , 1991, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[23]  R K Ten Haken,et al.  Three-dimensional motion analysis of an improved head immobilization system for simulation, CT, MRI, and PET imaging. , 1991, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[24]  S. Shalev,et al.  A ρ‐θ technique for treatment verification in radiotherapy and its clinical applications , 1993 .

[25]  M van Herk,et al.  A comprehensive system for the analysis of portal images. , 1993, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[26]  M van Herk,et al.  Optimization of automatic portal image analysis. , 1995, Medical physics.

[27]  Peter Dickof,et al.  A comparison of line integral algorithms , 1990 .

[28]  M van Herk,et al.  A verification procedure to improve patient set-up accuracy using portal images. , 1993, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[29]  D. R. Fish,et al.  A patient-to-computed-tomography image registration method based on digitally reconstructed radiographs. , 1994, Medical physics.

[30]  D L McShan,et al.  Automated determination of patient setup errors in radiation therapy using spherical radio-opaque markers. , 1993, Medical physics.