Comparison of three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography-based dosimetric analysis of head-and-neck patients with weight loss
Purpose: This investigation compares three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based dosimetric analysis to a method based on repeat computed tomography (CT). Materials and Methods: Seventeen head-and-neck patients treated in 2020, and with a repeat CT, were included in the an...
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications
2022-01-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Medical Physics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.jmp.org.in/article.asp?issn=0971-6203;year=2022;volume=47;issue=4;spage=344;epage=351;aulast=Rathee |
| _version_ | 1797904863141560320 |
|---|---|
| author | Satyapal Rathee Benjamin Burke Amr Heikal |
| author_facet | Satyapal Rathee Benjamin Burke Amr Heikal |
| author_sort | Satyapal Rathee |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Purpose: This investigation compares three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based dosimetric analysis to a method based on repeat computed tomography (CT). Materials and Methods: Seventeen head-and-neck patients treated in 2020, and with a repeat CT, were included in the analyses. The planning CT was deformed to anatomy in repeat CT to generate a reference plan. Two of the CBCT-based methods generated test plans by deforming the planning CT to CBCT of fraction N using VelocityAI™ and SmartAdapt®. The third method compared directly calculated doses on the CBCT for fraction 1 and fraction N, using PerFraction™. Maximum dose to spinal cord (Cord_dmax) and dose to 95% volume (D95) of planning target volumes (PTVs) were used to assess “need to replan” criteria. Results: The VelocityAI™ method provided results that most accurately matched the reference plan in “need to replan” criteria using either Cord_dmax or PTV D95. SmartAdapt® method overestimated the change in Cord_dmax (6.77% vs. 3.85%, P < 0.01) and change in cord volume (9.56% vs. 0.67%, P < 0.01) resulting in increased false positives in “need to replan” criteria, and performed similarly to VelocityAI™ for D95, but yielded more false negatives. PerFraction™ method underestimated Cord_dmax, did not perform any volume deformation, and missed all “need to replan” cases based on cord dose. It also yielded high false negatives using the D95 PTV criteria. Conclusions: The VelocityAI™-based method using fraction N CBCT is most similar to the reference plan using repeat CT; the other two methods had significant differences. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-10T09:55:39Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a14e19ebf86b4afeb9b2758e748a12d3 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 0971-6203 1998-3913 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-10T09:55:39Z |
| publishDate | 2022-01-01 |
| publisher | Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Journal of Medical Physics |
| spelling | doaj.art-a14e19ebf86b4afeb9b2758e748a12d32023-02-16T12:33:57ZengWolters Kluwer Medknow PublicationsJournal of Medical Physics0971-62031998-39132022-01-0147434435110.4103/jmp.jmp_7_22Comparison of three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography-based dosimetric analysis of head-and-neck patients with weight lossSatyapal RatheeBenjamin BurkeAmr HeikalPurpose: This investigation compares three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based dosimetric analysis to a method based on repeat computed tomography (CT). Materials and Methods: Seventeen head-and-neck patients treated in 2020, and with a repeat CT, were included in the analyses. The planning CT was deformed to anatomy in repeat CT to generate a reference plan. Two of the CBCT-based methods generated test plans by deforming the planning CT to CBCT of fraction N using VelocityAI™ and SmartAdapt®. The third method compared directly calculated doses on the CBCT for fraction 1 and fraction N, using PerFraction™. Maximum dose to spinal cord (Cord_dmax) and dose to 95% volume (D95) of planning target volumes (PTVs) were used to assess “need to replan” criteria. Results: The VelocityAI™ method provided results that most accurately matched the reference plan in “need to replan” criteria using either Cord_dmax or PTV D95. SmartAdapt® method overestimated the change in Cord_dmax (6.77% vs. 3.85%, P < 0.01) and change in cord volume (9.56% vs. 0.67%, P < 0.01) resulting in increased false positives in “need to replan” criteria, and performed similarly to VelocityAI™ for D95, but yielded more false negatives. PerFraction™ method underestimated Cord_dmax, did not perform any volume deformation, and missed all “need to replan” cases based on cord dose. It also yielded high false negatives using the D95 PTV criteria. Conclusions: The VelocityAI™-based method using fraction N CBCT is most similar to the reference plan using repeat CT; the other two methods had significant differences.http://www.jmp.org.in/article.asp?issn=0971-6203;year=2022;volume=47;issue=4;spage=344;epage=351;aulast=Ratheecone-beam computed tomographydeformable registrationhead and neckweight loss |
| spellingShingle | Satyapal Rathee Benjamin Burke Amr Heikal Comparison of three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography-based dosimetric analysis of head-and-neck patients with weight loss Journal of Medical Physics cone-beam computed tomography deformable registration head and neck weight loss |
| title | Comparison of three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography-based dosimetric analysis of head-and-neck patients with weight loss |
| title_full | Comparison of three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography-based dosimetric analysis of head-and-neck patients with weight loss |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography-based dosimetric analysis of head-and-neck patients with weight loss |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography-based dosimetric analysis of head-and-neck patients with weight loss |
| title_short | Comparison of three commercial methods of cone-beam computed tomography-based dosimetric analysis of head-and-neck patients with weight loss |
| title_sort | comparison of three commercial methods of cone beam computed tomography based dosimetric analysis of head and neck patients with weight loss |
| topic | cone-beam computed tomography deformable registration head and neck weight loss |
| url | http://www.jmp.org.in/article.asp?issn=0971-6203;year=2022;volume=47;issue=4;spage=344;epage=351;aulast=Rathee |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT satyapalrathee comparisonofthreecommercialmethodsofconebeamcomputedtomographybaseddosimetricanalysisofheadandneckpatientswithweightloss AT benjaminburke comparisonofthreecommercialmethodsofconebeamcomputedtomographybaseddosimetricanalysisofheadandneckpatientswithweightloss AT amrheikal comparisonofthreecommercialmethodsofconebeamcomputedtomographybaseddosimetricanalysisofheadandneckpatientswithweightloss |