WE‐E‐BRC‐08: Evaluation of a Probabilistic Non‐Rigid Registration Method for Improved Intra‐Operative Target Definition in 125‐I Permanent Prostate Implants

• Published in: Medical Physics 2011-06, Vol.38 (6), p.3820-3820
• Main Authors: Pursley, J, Risholm, P, Fedorov, A, Tuncali, K, Fennessy, F, Wells, W
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Biomechanics; Brachytherapy; Dosimetry; Magnetic resonance imaging; Medical imaging; Medical magnetic resonance imaging; Ultrasonography; Visual medical imaging
• ISSN: 0094-2405; 2473-4209
• DOI: 10.1118/1.3613386

Purpose: To evaluate the use of a non‐rigid registration method for improved intra‐operative target definition in 125‐I permanent prostate implants. Methods: The validation dataset was created from 10 MRI‐guided prostate biopsy patients with both diagnostic (with endorectal coil) and intra‐procedural (without endorectal coil) 3 Tesla MRI scans under an IRB approved protocol. A biomechanical‐based probabilistic non‐rigid registration method was adapted to register diagnostic to intra‐procedural images by matching the contoured prostate boundaries. The probabilistic framework provides a collection of prostate configurations under deformation, or a marginal probability map for a given location to be identified as inside the prostate by the registration. The marginal probability map was compared to the intra‐procedural prostate contour. 125‐I treatment plans were generated for the intra‐procedural scans. Results: In two cases we find that ∼5% of the prostate volume within the 50th percentile of the marginal deformed probability is not included in the intra‐procedural contour, and 3–4% of the intra‐procedural prostate volume is not included in any of the deformed configurations. Different regions of the prostate have varying uncertainties; preliminary results show margins of 1–2 mm near mid‐gland and 3–4 mm around the apex. We present geometric uncertainties and the resulting variation of dosimetric quantities in the base, mid‐gland, apex and peripheral zone of the prostate. Conclusions: We study the feasibility of using a probabilistic non‐rigid registration method for supplementing intra‐procedural images with diagnostic MR images. The method is evaluated geometrically and dosimetrically, which quantifies the method's ability to provide intra‐procedural estimation of the accuracy of the deformed configurations. This method will be applied to registration of diagnostic MR with intra‐procedural transrectal ultrasound images to improve visualization of the prostate apex and substructure, which could provide improved prostate boundary definitions with uncertainty margins to guide the development of intra‐operative brachytherapy treatment plans. This work was supported by NIH grants 1U41RR019703‐01A2, 1R01CA111288‐01A1,P01‐CA67165,andU01CA151261.