Prostate seed implant quality assessment using MR and CT image fusion.

PURPOSE After a seed implant of the prostate, computerized tomography (CT) is ideal for determining seed distribution but soft tissue anatomy is frequently not well visualized. Magnetic resonance (MR) images soft tissue anatomy well but seed visualization is problematic. We describe a method of fusing CT and MR images to exploit the advantages of both of these modalities when assessing the quality of a prostate seed implant. METHODS AND MATERIALS Eleven consecutive prostate seed implant patients were imaged with axial MR and CT scans. MR and CT images were fused in three dimensions using the Pinnacle 3.0 version of the ADAC treatment planning system. The urethra and bladder base were used to "line up" MR and CT image sets during image fusion. Alignment was accomplished using translation and rotation in the three ortho-normal planes. Accuracy of image fusion was evaluated by calculating the maximum deviation in millimeters between the center of the urethra on axial MR versus CT images. Implant quality was determined by comparing dosimetric results to previously set parameters. RESULTS Image fusion was performed with a high degree of accuracy. When lining up the urethra and base of bladder, the maximum difference in axial position of the urethra between MR and CT averaged 2.5 mm (range 1.3-4.0 mm, SD 0.9 mm). By projecting CT-derived dose distributions over MR images of soft tissue structures, qualitative and quantitative evaluation of implant quality is straightforward. CONCLUSIONS The image-fusion process we describe provides a sophisticated way of assessing the quality of a prostate seed implant. Commercial software makes the process time-efficient and available to any clinical practice with a high-quality treatment planning system. While we use MR to image soft tissue structures, the process could be used with any imaging modality that is able to visualize the prostatic urethra (e.g., ultrasound).

[1]  J J Prete,et al.  Source localization following permanent transperineal prostate interstitial brachytherapy using magnetic resonance imaging. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[2]  P L Roberson,et al.  Impact of differences in ultrasound and computed tomography volumes on treatment planning of permanent prostate implants. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[3]  J. Blasko,et al.  Prostate specific antigen based disease control following ultrasound guided 125iodine implantation for stage T1/T2 prostatic carcinoma. , 1995, The Journal of urology.

[4]  J. Roy,et al.  Dosimetry guidelines to minimize urethral and rectal morbidity following transperineal I-125 prostate brachytherapy. , 1995, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[5]  R. Jeffrey,et al.  Evaluation of prostate size: A comparison of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging , 1988, Urologic radiology.

[6]  K. Wallner,et al.  CT-based dosimetry for transperineal I-125 prostate brachytherapy. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[7]  M A Moerland,et al.  Evaluation of permanent I-125 prostate implants using radiography and magnetic resonance imaging. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[8]  S L Schoeppel,et al.  Treatment planning issues related to prostate movement in response to differential filling of the rectum and bladder. , 1991, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[9]  I. Barillot,et al.  2095 Observer and imaging modality (CT, MRI) related definition of the prostate , 1997 .

[10]  H. Hricak,et al.  Prostate volumes defined by magnetic resonance imaging and computerized tomographic scans for three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy. , 1996, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[11]  R. Jeffrey,et al.  Evaluation of prostate size: A comparison of ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging , 1988, Urologic radiology.

[12]  B W Corn,et al.  Effect of edema on the post-implant dosimetry of an I-125 prostate implant: a case study. , 1997, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.