TU-H-CAMPUS-JeP1-05: Dose Deformation Error Associated with Deformable Image Registration Pathways

• Published in: Medical physics (Lancaster) 2016-06, Vol.43 (6), p.3779-3779
• Main Authors: Surucu, M, Woerner, A, Roeske, J
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: 60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; Cancer; COMPUTERIZED TOMOGRAPHY; Cone beam computed tomography; DEFORMATION; ERRORS; GY RANGE 01-10; GY RANGE 10-100; Image registration; Medical imaging; PATIENTS; QUALITY ASSURANCE; RADIATION DOSES; RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY
• ISSN: 0094-2405; 2473-4209
• DOI: 10.1118/1.4957673

Purpose: To evaluate errors associated with using different deformable image registration (DIR) pathways to deform dose from planning CT (pCT) to cone-beam CT (CBCT). Methods: Deforming dose is controversial because of the lack of quality assurance tools. We previously proposed a novel metric to evaluate dose deformation error (DDE) by warping dose information using two methods, via dose and contour deformation. First, isodose lines of the pCT were converted into structures and then deformed to the CBCT using an image based deformation map (dose/structure/deform). Alternatively, the dose matrix from the pCT was deformed to CBCT using the same deformation map, and then the same isodose lines of the deformed dose were converted into structures (dose/deform/structure). The doses corresponding to each structure were queried from the deformed dose and full-width-half-maximums were used to evaluate the dose dispersion. The difference between the FWHM of each isodose level structure is defined as the DDE. Three head-and-neck cancer patients were identified. For each patient, two DIRs were performed between the pCT and CBCT, either deforming pCT-to-CBCT or CBCT-to-pCT. We evaluated the errors associated by using either of these pathways to deform dose. A commercially available, Demons based DIR was used for this study, and 10 isodose levels (20% to 105%) were used to evaluate the errors in various dose levels. Results: The prescription dose for all patients was 70 Gy. The mean DDE for CT-to-CBCT deformation was 1.0 Gy (range: 0.3–2.0 Gy) and this was increased to 4.3 Gy (range: 1.5–6.4 Gy) for CBCT-to-CT deformation. The mean increase in DDE between the two deformations was 3.3 Gy (range: 1.0–5.4 Gy). Conclusion: The proposed DDF was used to quantitatively estimate dose deformation errors caused by different pathways to perform DIR. Deforming dose using CBCT-to-CT deformation produced greater error than CT-to-CBCT deformation.