Development of an automatic evaluation method for patient positioning error

Abstract

Highly accurate radiotherapy needs highly accurate patient positioning. At our facility, patient positioning is manually performed by radiology technicians. After the positioning, positioning error is measured by manually comparing some positions on a digital radiography image (DR) to the corresponding positions on a digitally reconstructed radiography image (DRR). This method is prone to error and can be time‐consuming because of its manual nature. Therefore, we propose an automated measuring method for positioning error to improve patient throughput and achieve higher reliability. The error between a position on the DR and a position on the DRR was calculated to determine the best matched position using the block‐matching method. The zero‐mean normalized cross‐correlation was used as our evaluation function, and the Gaussian weight function was used to increase importance as the pixel position approached the isocenter. The accuracy of the calculation method was evaluated using pelvic phantom images, and the method's effectiveness was evaluated on images of prostate cancer patients before the positioning, comparing them with the results of radiology technicians' measurements. The root mean square error (RMSE) of the calculation method for the pelvic phantom was 0.23±0.05 mm. The coefficients between the calculation method and the measurement results of the technicians were 0.989 for the phantom images and 0.980 for the patient images. The RMSE of the total evaluation results of positioning for prostate cancer patients using the calculation method was 0.32±0.18 mm. Using the proposed method, we successfully measured residual positioning errors. The accuracy and effectiveness of the method was evaluated for pelvic phantom images and images of prostate cancer patients. In the future, positioning for cancer patients at other sites will be evaluated using the calculation method. Consequently, we expect an improvement in treatment throughput for these other sites.PACS number: 87

Changes in Rectal Dose Due to Alterations in Beam Angles for Setup Uncertainty and Range Uncertainty in Carbon-Ion Radiotherapy for Prostate Cancer

“…In patient positioning, both orthogonal (frontal and lateral) X-ray images and digitally reconstructed radiographs from CT images are used, with the bony structures for landmarks [ 16 ]. We employed a 2-mm setup tolerance [ 17 ].…”

Evaluation of the accuracy and clinical practicality of a calculation system for patient positional displacement in carbon ion radiotherapy at five sites

“…In our previous study, the average of the absolute value of the initial deviation before positioning in prostate cancer cases was 3.0 AE 3.4 mm (maximum value, 14.8 mm). 17 In the case of patient positioning at our facility, because laser alignment is performed before…”

“…[14][15][16] The system can calculate the positional displacements between the DR and DRR. A flowchart of the calculation algorithm for our system is shown in Zero-mean normalized cross-correlation (ZNCC) 11,17 was used to assess the similarity between DR and DRR. ZNCC is shown in eq.…”

Fiducial marker matching versus vertebral body matching: Dosimetric impact of patient positioning in carbon ion radiotherapy for primary hepatic cancer

“…Using the concept of a spread-out Bragg peak (SOBP), carbon ion beams provide excellent dose conformity to the target region. However, unless the water-equivalent path length (WEPL) to the target is determined and accounted for, the position of the Bragg peak may differ from what is planned and the target coverage could be insufficient [4]. Additionally, because of the steeper lateral penumbra of carbon ion beams compared with X-rays or proton beams, dose coverage for the target region is sensitive to organ motion perpendicular to the beam path [5].…”