Premium
SU‐G‐JeP3‐01: A Method to Quantify Lung SBRT Target Localization Accuracy Based On Digitally Reconstructed Fluoroscopy
Author(s) -
Lafata K,
Ren L,
Cai J,
Yin F
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.4957066
Subject(s) - imaging phantom , image guided radiation therapy , fluoroscopy , computer science , nuclear medicine , artificial intelligence , computer vision , physics , medical imaging , mathematics , optics , medicine , nuclear physics
Purpose: To develop a methodology based on digitally‐reconstructed‐fluoroscopy (DRF) to quantitatively assess target localization accuracy of lung SBRT, and to evaluate using both a dynamic digital phantom and a patient dataset. Methods: For each treatment field, a 10‐phase DRF is generated based on the planning 4DCT. Each frame is pre‐processed with a morphological top‐hat filter, and corresponding beam apertures are projected to each detector plane. A template‐matching algorithm based on cross‐correlation is used to detect the tumor location in each frame. Tumor motion relative beam aperture is extracted in the superior‐inferior direction based on each frame's impulse response to the template, and the mean tumor position (MTP) is calculated as the average tumor displacement. The DRF template coordinates are then transferred to the corresponding MV‐cine dataset, which is retrospectively filtered as above. The treatment MTP is calculated within each field's projection space, relative to the DRF‐defined template. The field's localization error is defined as the difference between the DRF‐derived‐MTP (planning) and the MV‐cine‐derived‐MTP (delivery). A dynamic digital phantom was used to assess the algorithm's ability to detect intra‐fractional changes in patient alignment, by simulating different spatial variations in the MV‐cine and calculating the corresponding change in MTP. Inter‐and‐intra‐fractional variation, IGRT accuracy, and filtering effects were investigated on a patient dataset. Results: Phantom results demonstrated a high accuracy in detecting both translational and rotational variation. The lowest localization error of the patient dataset was achieved at each fraction's first field (mean=0.38mm), with Fx3 demonstrating a particularly strong correlation between intra‐fractional motion‐caused localization error and treatment progress. Filtering significantly improved tracking visibility in both the DRF and MV‐cine images. Conclusion: We have developed and evaluated a methodology to quantify lung SBRT target localization accuracy based on digitally‐reconstructed‐fluoroscopy. Our approach may be useful in potentially reducing treatment margins to optimize lung SBRT outcomes. R01‐184173