Comparison of Liver Tumor Motion With and Without Abdominal Compression Using Cine-Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Eccles, C.; Patel, Rikinkumar S; Simeonov, Anna; Lockwood, Gina; Haider, Masoom A.; Dawson, Laura A.

doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.04.028

Cited by 81 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Logfile data from the Synchrony system record the tumor motion during the treatment, and the amplitudes determined by the logfile data may be closer to reality than 4DCT or CBCT methods. Eccles et al20 evaluated the liver tumor motion using cine‐MRI, and the scanning time was at least 5 min. The logfile‐based amplitudes in this study were consistent with the results reported by the above literature, which showed the amplitudes measured for long periods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the intra‐ and interfractional tumor motion and variability by fiducial‐based real‐time tracking in liver stereotactic body radiation therapy

Liang

Liu

Xue

et al. 2018

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeTumor motion amplitude varies during treatment. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the intra‐ and interfraction tumor motion and variability in patients with liver cancer treated with fiducial‐based real‐time tracking stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).MethodsFourteen liver patients were treated with SBRT using a CyberKnife. Two to four fiducial markers implanted near the tumor were used for real‐time monitoring using the Synchrony system. The tumor motion information during treatment was extracted from the log files recorded by the Synchrony system. Logfile‐based amplitudes in the superior–posterior (SI), left–right (LR) and anterior–posterior (AP) directions were compared to the 4DCT‐based amplitudes. The intra‐ and interfraction amplitude variations and the incidence of baseline shifts were analyzed for 66 fractions administered to 14 patients.ResultsThe median (range) logfile‐based liver motion amplitudes for all patients were 11.9 (5.1–17.3) mm, 1.3 (0.4–4) mm and 3.8 (0.9–7.7) mm in the SI, LR and AP directions, respectively. Compared with the logfile‐based amplitude, the 4DCT‐based amplitude was underestimated (P < 0.05). The median (range) intra‐ and interfraction liver motion amplitude variations were 4.3 (1.6–6.0) mm (SI), 0.5 (0.2–2.2) mm(LR) and 1.5 (0.3–3.3) mm (AP) and 1.7 (0.5–4.6) mm (SI), 0.3 (0.1–3.0) mm (LR) and 0.7 (0.3–2.7) mm (AP), respectively. Baseline shifts exceeding 2 mm, 3 mm and 5 mm were observed in 27.3%, 7.6% and 3% of the measurements, respectively, within 10 min, and in 66.7%, 38.1% and 19%, respectively, within 30 min for the square root of the sum of the squares of the distances in the SI, LR and AP directions (3D). The tumor motion amplitude was found to be correlated with the baseline shift.ConclusionsMost patients showed significant intra‐ and interfraction liver motion amplitude variations over the entire course of radiation. More caution is needed for patients with large tumor motion amplitudes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the intra‐ and interfractional tumor motion and variability by fiducial‐based real‐time tracking in liver stereotactic body radiation therapy

Liang

Liu

Xue

et al. 2018

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…But we made this choice because most of the authors evaluating 3D-Intrafraction and Interfraction motion have described that the largest intrafraction motion occurs in this direction. 31,43,45,[50][51][52] Ge et al reported that although the respiratory-induced tumor motion was found to be the largest in the SI direction, the impact of AP motion on gating accuracy could be non-negligible if the patient was not set up optimally in that direction. 46 In our study, mean fraction delivery time (room occupation) was 53 min for the first fraction, but time was dramatically reduced down to 24 min after the second or third fraction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Imaged-guided liver stereotactic body radiotherapy using VMAT and real-time adaptive tumor gating. Concerns about technique and preliminary clinical results

Llacer-Moscardo

Riou

Azria

et al. 2017

Reports of Practical Oncology & Radiotherapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The duodenum is considered an organ of interest in the treatment of liver tumors. A liver tumor was selected because it was directly susceptible to respiration‐induced motion (21) . Due to the irregular nature of respiration, variation in respiration‐induced organ motion may occur between breathing cycles.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparative study of automatic image segmentation algorithms for target tracking in MR‐IGRT

Feng

Kawrakow

Olsen

et al. 2016

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On‐board magnetic resonance (MR) image guidance during radiation therapy offers the potential for more accurate treatment delivery. To utilize the real‐time image information, a crucial prerequisite is the ability to successfully segment and track regions of interest (ROI). The purpose of this work is to evaluate the performance of different segmentation algorithms using motion images (4 frames per second) acquired using a MR image‐guided radiotherapy (MR‐IGRT) system. Manual contours of the kidney, bladder, duodenum, and a liver tumor by an experienced radiation oncologist were used as the ground truth for performance evaluation. Besides the manual segmentation, images were automatically segmented using thresholding, fuzzy k‐means (FKM), k‐harmonic means (KHM), and reaction‐diffusion level set evolution (RD‐LSE) algorithms, as well as the tissue tracking algorithm provided by the ViewRay treatment planning and delivery system (VR‐TPDS). The performance of the five algorithms was evaluated quantitatively by comparing with the manual segmentation using the Dice coefficient and target registration error (TRE) measured as the distance between the centroid of the manual ROI and the centroid of the automatically segmented ROI. All methods were able to successfully segment the bladder and the kidney, but only FKM, KHM, and VR‐TPDS were able to segment the liver tumor and the duodenum. The performance of the thresholding, FKM, KHM, and RD‐LSE algorithms degraded as the local image contrast decreased, whereas the performance of the VP‐TPDS method was nearly independent of local image contrast due to the reference registration algorithm. For segmenting high‐contrast images (i.e., kidney), the thresholding method provided the best speed (<1 ms) with a satisfying accuracy (Dice=0.95). When the image contrast was low, the VR‐TPDS method had the best automatic contour. Results suggest an image quality determination procedure before segmentation and a combination of different methods for optimal segmentation with the on‐board MR‐IGRT system.PACS number(s): 87.57.nm, 87.57.N‐, 87.61.Tg

show abstract

Comparison of Liver Tumor Motion With and Without Abdominal Compression Using Cine-Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Cited by 81 publications

References 42 publications

Evaluation of the intra‐ and interfractional tumor motion and variability by fiducial‐based real‐time tracking in liver stereotactic body radiation therapy

Evaluation of the intra‐ and interfractional tumor motion and variability by fiducial‐based real‐time tracking in liver stereotactic body radiation therapy

Imaged-guided liver stereotactic body radiotherapy using VMAT and real-time adaptive tumor gating. Concerns about technique and preliminary clinical results

A comparative study of automatic image segmentation algorithms for target tracking in MR‐IGRT

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About