Accuracy quantification of a deformable image registration tool applied in a clinical setting

• Published in: Journal of applied clinical medical physics 2014-01, Vol.15 (1), p.237-245
• Main Authors: Hoffmann, Christoph, Krause, Sonja, Stoiber, Eva Maria, Mohr, Angela, Rieken, Stefan, Schramm, Oliver, Debus, Jürgen, Sterzing, Florian, Bendl, Rolf, Giske, Kristina
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Abdominal Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Abdominal Neoplasms - pathology; Abdominal Neoplasms - radiotherapy; Accuracy; adaptive radiation therapy; Cancer; Cohort Studies; Datasets; deformable image registration; expert‐defined landmarks; Head and Neck Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Head and Neck Neoplasms - pathology; Head and Neck Neoplasms - radiotherapy; Humans; Image Processing, Computer-Assisted - methods; interobserver variations; Medical imaging; Methods; Neck; Patients; Planning; Prognosis; Radiation Oncology Physics; Radiation therapy; Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted - methods; Radiotherapy Dosage; Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted; Registration; Software; target registration error; Thoracic Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging; Thoracic Neoplasms - pathology; Thoracic Neoplasms - radiotherapy; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Velocity
• ISSN: 1526-9914; 1526-9914
• DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v15i1.4564

The purpose of this study was to test the accuracy of a commercially available deformable image registration tool in a clinical situation. In addition, to demonstrate a method to evaluate the resulting transformation of such a tool to a reference defined by multiple experts. For 16 patients (seven head and neck, four thoracic, five abdominal), 30‐50 anatomical landmarks were defined on recognizable spots of a planning CT and a corresponding fraction CT. A commercially available deformable image registration tool, Velocity AI, was used to align all fraction CTs with the respective planning CTs. The registration accuracy was quantified by means of the target registration error in respect to expert‐defined landmarks, considering the interobserver variation of five observers. The interobserver uncertainty of the landmark definition in our data sets is found to be 1.2±1.1mm. In general the deformable image registration tool decreases the extent of observable misalignments from 4‐8 mm to 1‐4 mm for nearly 50% of the landmarks (to 77% in sum). Only small differences are observed in the alignment quality of scans with different tumor location. Smallest residual deviations were achieved in scans of the head and neck region (79%,≤4mm) and the thoracic cases (79%,≤4mm), followed by the abdominal cases (59%,≤4mm). No difference is observed in the alignment quality of different tissue types (bony vs. soft tissue). The investigated commercially available deformable image registration tool is capable of reducing a mean target registration error to a level that is clinically acceptable for the evaluation of retreatment plans and replanning in case of gross tumor change during treatment. Yet, since the alignment quality needs to be improved further, the individual result of the deformable image registration tool has still to be judged by the physician prior to application. PACS numbers: 87.57.nj, 87.57.N‐, 87.55.‐x