Thumbnail
Access Restriction
Open

Author Lin, T. ♦ Ma, C.
Source United States Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information
Content type Text
Language English
Subject Keyword APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES ♦ RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY ♦ ACCURACY ♦ CHEST ♦ COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY ♦ IMAGES ♦ LUNGS ♦ NEOPLASMS ♦ NOISE ♦ PHANTOMS ♦ RADIOTHERAPY ♦ RESPIRATION ♦ SIGNAL-TO-NOISE RATIO ♦ SURGERY ♦ THICKNESS
Abstract Purpose: To compare and quantify respiratory motion artifacts in images from free breathing 4D-CT-on-Rails(CTOR) and those from MV-Cone-beam-CT(MVCB) and facilitate respiratory motion guided radiation therapy. Methods: 4D-CTOR: Siemens Somatom CT-on-Rails system with Anzai belt loaded with pressure sensor load cells. 4D scans were performed in helical mode, pitch 0.1, gantry rotation time 0.5s, 1.5mm slice thickness, 120kVp, 400 mAs. Normal and fast breathing (>12rpm) scanning protocols were investigated. Helical scan, AIP(average intensity projection) and MIP(maximum intensity projection) were generated from 4D-CTOR scans with amplitude sorting into 10 phases.MVCB: Siemens Artiste diamond view(1MV)MVCB was performed with 5MU thorax protocol with 60 second of full rotation.Phantom: Anzai AZ-733V respiratory phantom. The settings were set to normal and resp. modes with repetition rates at 15 rpm and 10 rpm. Surgical clips, acrylic, wooden, rubber and lung density, total six mock-ups were scanned and compared in this study.Signal-to-noise ratio(SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio(CNR) and reconstructed motion volume were compared to different respiratory setups for the mock-ups. Results: Reconstructed motion volume was compared to the real object volume for the six test mock-ups. It shows that free breathing helical in all instances underestimates the object excursions largest to −67.4% and least −6.3%. Under normal breathing settings, MIP can predict very precise motion volume with minimum 0.4% and largest −13.9%. MVCB shows underestimate of the motion volume with −1.11% minimum and −18.0% maximum. With fast breathing, AIP provides bad representation of the object motion; however, the MIP can predict the motion volume with −2.0% to −11.4% underestimate. Conclusion: Respiratory motion guided radiation therapy requires good motion recording. This study shows that regular CTOR helical scans provides bad guidance, 4D CTOR AIP cannot represent the fast breathing pattern, MIP can represent the best motion volume, MVCBCT can only be used for normal breathing with acceptable uncertainties.
ISSN 00942405
Educational Use Research
Learning Resource Type Article
Publisher Date 2016-06-15
Publisher Place United States
Journal Medical Physics
Volume Number 43
Issue Number 6


Open content in new tab

   Open content in new tab