International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2019
Combined Ultrasound and Cone Beam CT Improves Target Segmentation for Image Guided Radiation Therapy in Uterine Cervix Cancer.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Mason Sarah A, White Ingrid M, O'Shea Tuathan, McNair Helen A, Alexander Sophie, Kalaitzaki Eleftheria, Bamber Jeffrey C, Harris Emma J, Lalondrelle Susan
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Adaptive radiation therapy strategies could account for interfractional uterine motion observed in patients with cervix cancer, but the current cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based treatment workflow is limited by poor soft-tissue contrast. The goal of the present study was to determine if ultrasound (US) could be used to improve visualization of the uterus, either as a single modality or in combination with CBCT.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Interobserver uterine contour agreement and confidence were compared on 40 corresponding CBCT, US, and CBCT-US-fused images from 11 patients with cervix cancer. Contour agreement was measured using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and mean contour-to-contour distance (MCCD). Observers rated their contour confidence on a scale from 1 to 10. Pairwise Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to measure differences in contour agreement and confidence.
RESULTS: CBCT-US fused images had significantly better contour agreement and confidence than either individual modality (P < .05), with median (interquartile range [IQR]) values of 0.84 (0.11), 1.26 (0.23) mm, and 7 (2) for the DSC, MCCD, and observer confidence ratings, respectively. Contour agreement was similar between US and CBCT, with median (IQR) DSCs of 0.81 (0.17) and 0.82 (0.14) and MCCDs of 1.75 (1.15) mm and 1.62 (0.74) mm. Observers were significantly more confident in their US-based contours than in their CBCT-based contours (P < .05), with median (IQR) confidence ratings of 7 (2.75) versus 5 (4).
CONCLUSIONS: CBCT and US are complementary and improve uterine segmentation precision when combined. Observers could localize the uterus with a similar precision on independent US and CBCT images.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: Interobserver uterine contour agreement and confidence were compared on 40 corresponding CBCT, US, and CBCT-US-fused images from 11 patients with cervix cancer. Contour agreement was measured using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and mean contour-to-contour distance (MCCD). Observers rated their contour confidence on a scale from 1 to 10. Pairwise Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to measure differences in contour agreement and confidence.
RESULTS: CBCT-US fused images had significantly better contour agreement and confidence than either individual modality (P < .05), with median (interquartile range [IQR]) values of 0.84 (0.11), 1.26 (0.23) mm, and 7 (2) for the DSC, MCCD, and observer confidence ratings, respectively. Contour agreement was similar between US and CBCT, with median (IQR) DSCs of 0.81 (0.17) and 0.82 (0.14) and MCCDs of 1.75 (1.15) mm and 1.62 (0.74) mm. Observers were significantly more confident in their US-based contours than in their CBCT-based contours (P < .05), with median (IQR) confidence ratings of 7 (2.75) versus 5 (4).
CONCLUSIONS: CBCT and US are complementary and improve uterine segmentation precision when combined. Observers could localize the uterus with a similar precision on independent US and CBCT images.