Accuracy of a 3D laser∕camera surface imaging system for setup verification of the pelvic and thoracic regions in radiotherapy treatments.

PURPOSE The aim of this paper is to investigate the accuracy of a laser∕camera surface imaging system (Sentinel) when used on patients treated in the thorax or pelvic regions and to evaluate system employment conditions and patient setup procedures that provide more accurate results. METHODS The system was tested on two groups of patients for whom different patient setup procedures and Sentinel employment conditions were considered. For the first group of 33 patients (FG) no changes to the usual setup procedures were made and a surface extension limited to the treated region was considered. For the second group of 14 patients (SG) the reproducibility of external body surfaces, including body parts not in close proximity to the treatment site, was optimized and a wider surface was captured. In all cases the system accuracy was evaluated comparing registration results from concurrent Sentinel and cone beam CT (CBCT) acquisitions for a total of 192 occasions. External body surfaces, extracted from planning CT studies, were used as reference in both cases, but for SG also surface data captured by Sentinel system at the first treatment were employed. RESULTS In the 90th percentile of the distributions reporting CBCT and Sentinel registration parameters, absolute differences for FG were less than 6.4 mm and 3.8°. Better performances were observed for SG (≤5.7 mm and 2°). Mean absolute differences between three translation and three rotation parameters of CBCT and Sentinel were: less than 3.5 mm and 2.1° and 3.7 mm and 1.3° in FG for thorax and pelvis, respectively, and less than 2.8 mm and 1° and 2.7 mm and 0.9° for pelvis and thorax, respectively, in SG. No advantage in considering surface data captured by Sentinel as a reference instead of the surface extracted from the planning CT was observed. CONCLUSIONS The accuracy of Sentinel system in detecting errors is influenced by the extension and reliability of the surface used. When the reproducibility of external body surfaces was optimized differences between CBCT and Sentinel registration parameters resulted less than 5.7 mm and 2° in the 90% of the pelvis and thorax considered cases. No advantage in considering a Sentinel acquisition as reference was observed.

[1]  G S Bauman,et al.  Dosimetric impact of image-guided 3D conformal radiation therapy of prostate cancer , 2005, Physics in medicine and biology.

[2]  Christopher J Moore,et al.  A feasibility study for image guided radiotherapy using low dose, high speed, cone beam X-ray volumetric imaging. , 2005, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[3]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  Comparison of target registration errors for multiple image-guided techniques in accelerated partial breast irradiation. , 2008, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[4]  Christian P Karger,et al.  Clinical evaluation of a laser surface scanning system in 120 patients for improving daily setup accuracy in fractionated radiation therapy. , 2013, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[5]  Christian P Karger,et al.  Technical performance of a commercial laser surface scanning system for patient setup correction in radiotherapy. , 2011, 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]  Marco Krengli,et al.  Reproducibility of patient setup by surface image registration system in conformal radiotherapy of prostate cancer , 2009, Radiation oncology.

[7]  Frederik Wenz,et al.  Phantom and in-vivo measurements of dose exposure by image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT): MV portal images vs. kV portal images vs. cone-beam CT. , 2007, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[8]  Steve B. Jiang,et al.  Frame-less and mask-less cranial stereotactic radiosurgery: a feasibility study , 2010, Physics in medicine and biology.

[9]  Christoph Bert,et al.  Clinical experience with a 3D surface patient setup system for alignment of partial-breast irradiation patients. , 2006, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[10]  Rae-Hong Park,et al.  Error sensitivity of rotation angles in the ICP algorithm , 1999, Electronic Imaging.

[11]  George T. Y. Chen,et al.  A phantom evaluation of a stereo-vision surface imaging system for radiotherapy patient setup. , 2005, Medical physics.

[12]  Target registration errors with surface imaging system in conformal radiotherapy for prostate cancer: study on 19 patients , 2012, La radiologia medica.

[13]  James A. Purdy,et al.  IGRT Using a Video-Based 3-D Surface Imaging System in Combination With CBCT , 2007 .

[14]  A. Brahme,et al.  4D laser camera for accurate patient positioning, collision avoidance, image fusion and adaptive approaches during diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. , 2008, Medical physics.

[15]  Stefania Pallotta,et al.  A phantom evaluation of Sentinel(™), a commercial laser/camera surface imaging system for patient setup verification in radiotherapy. , 2012, Medical physics.

[16]  Darren Kahler,et al.  Characterization of a real-time surface image-guided stereotactic positioning system. , 2010, Medical physics.

[17]  W. Schlegel,et al.  Accuracy of a commercial optical 3D surface imaging system for realignment of patients for radiotherapy of the thorax , 2007, Physics in medicine and biology.