Deformable versus rigid registration of PET/CT images for radiation treatment planning of head and neck and lung cancer patients: A retrospective dosimetric comparison

24Citations
Citations of this article
48Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical impact of using deformable registration in tumor volume definition between separately acquired PET/CT and planning CT images.Methods: Ten lung and 10 head and neck cancer patients were retrospectively selected. PET/CT images were registered with planning CT scans using commercially available software. Radiation oncologists defined two sets of gross tumor volumes based on either rigidly or deformably registered PET/CT images, and properties of these volumes were then compared.Results: The average displacement between rigid and deformable gross tumor volumes was 1.8 mm (0.7 mm) with a standard deviation of 1.0 mm (0.6 mm) for the head and neck (lung) cancer subjects. The Dice similarity coefficients ranged from 0.76-0.92 and 0.76-0.97 for the head and neck and lung subjects, respectively, indicating conformity. All gross tumor volumes received at least 95% of the prescribed dose to 99% of their volume. Differences in the mean radiation dose delivered to the gross tumor volumes were at most 2%. Differences in the fraction of the tumor volumes receiving 100% of the radiation dose were at most 5%.Conclusions: The study revealed limitations in the commercial software used to perform deformable registration. Unless significant anatomical differences between PET/CT and planning CT images are present, deformable registration was shown to be of marginal value when delineating gross tumor volumes. © 2014 Fortin et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fortin, D., Basran, P. S., Berrang, T., Peterson, D., & Wai, E. S. (2014). Deformable versus rigid registration of PET/CT images for radiation treatment planning of head and neck and lung cancer patients: A retrospective dosimetric comparison. Radiation Oncology, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-717X-9-50

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free