z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
CT slice index and thickness: Impact on organ contouring in radiation treatment planning for prostate cancer
Author(s) -
Berthelet E.,
Liu M.,
Truong P.,
Czaykowski P.,
Kalach N.,
Yu C.,
Patterson K.,
Currie T.,
Kristensen S.,
Kwan W.,
Moravan V.
Publication year - 2003
Publication title -
journal of applied clinical medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.83
H-Index - 48
ISSN - 1526-9914
DOI - 10.1120/jacmp.v4i4.2511
Subject(s) - isocenter , prostate , nuclear medicine , medicine , prostate cancer , contouring , rectum , radiation treatment planning , radiation therapy , radiology , cancer , surgery , engineering , engineering drawing , imaging phantom
Objective: To assess the impact of CT slice index and thickness (3 mm versus 5 mm) on (i) prostate volume, dimensions, and isocenter coordinates, (ii) bladder and rectal volumes, and (iii) DRR quality, in the treatment of prostate cancer. Methods: 16 patients with prostate cancer underwent two planning CT‐scans using 3 and 5 mm slice index/thickness. Prostate, bladder, and rectum were outlined on all scans. Prostate isocenter coordinates, maximum dimensions, and volumes were compared along with bladder and rectal volumes. Bladder volumes and maximum diameters were further investigated using a second observer. A comparative analysis of DRR quality was conducted as well as a dosimetric analysis using DVH. Results: The differences in measurements of prostate volume, isocenter coordinates and maximum dimensions between the 3 and 5 mm scans, were small and not statistically significant. Similar finding was seen for rectal volume. However, bladder volume was always larger on the 3 mm scan ( mean   difference = 27.9   cc ;     SE = 4.8   cc ;     95 %   CI :     17.7 − 38.2   cc ;     p < 0.001 ) and the findings were reproduced with the second observer ( mean   difference = 31.9   cc ;     SE = 4.7   cc ;     95 %   CI :     21.9 − 41.9   cc ;     p < 0.001 ) . The differences in volume are caused by a slight increase in (1) the measurement of the longitudinal dimensions on the 3 mm scans, and (2) the slice by slice measured bladder area on the 3 mm scans. The latter is due to partial volume effect. The 3 mm DRR were slightly better than the 5 mm DRR. The bladder DVH differed significantly in some patients. Conclusion: Bladder volume is significantly larger on the 3 mm scans. Differences in contoured areas may be accounted for, in part, by the partial volume effect. PACS number(s): 87.57.–s, 87.53.–j

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here