Prostate volume contouring: A 3D analysis of segmentation using 3DTRUS, CT, and MR

Smith, Wendy; Lewis, Colin; Bauman, Glenn; Rodrigues, George; D’Souza, David; Ash, Robert B.; Ho, Dong-Ru; Venkatesan, Varagur; Downey, Dónal B.; Fenster, Aaron

doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.11.027

Cited by 186 publications

(150 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

136

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The prostate volume comparisons between the CT‐based and MRI‐based prostate contours of our study are in agreement with previous studies. In our study, the mean volume ratio between CT‐based prostate volumes and the MR‐defined prostate volumes ranged from 1.11 to 1.45, which is consistent with the results of 1.10 to 1.32 in the previous studies 15, 16, 17, 31…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…The difficulties in defining the prostate contour using CT images are well‐known 15. Many CT prostate segmentation technologies have been investigated in recent years, such as the models‐based,23, 24, 25 classification‐based26, 27, 28 and registration‐based29, 30 methods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many studies have shown that accurate prostate volumes can be obtained with both MRI and ultrasound 15, 19, 32, 33, 34. Traditionally, TRUS suffers from difficulties in distinguishing both the prostate apex and base, but the difficulty identifying margins may be alleviated using 3D TRUS technology 15.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Traditionally, TRUS suffers from difficulties in distinguishing both the prostate apex and base, but the difficulty identifying margins may be alleviated using 3D TRUS technology 15. For instance, determination of superior and inferior borders can be assisted using reconstructed sagittal views.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Studies have shown that CT‐based prostate contours often overestimate the prostate volumes by over 30%, due to the following issues: tendency to include portions of neurovascular bundles; poor definition of the interface between the posterior prostate edge and the anterior rectal wall; and difficulties distinguishing the lower limit of the prostate apical region because of its close proximity to the pelvic floor muscles and the poor contrast between these two soft tissues 15. To overcome the inaccuracy of CT‐based prostate contour, we propose to incorporate TRUS‐based prostate contour, which has been shown to provide accurate prostate volumes 16, 17, 18, 19.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Improved prostate delineation in prostate HDR brachytherapy with TRUS‐CT deformable registration technology: A pilot study with MRI validation

Yang

Rossi

Jani

et al. 2017

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Accurate prostate delineation is essential to ensure proper target coverage and normal‐tissue sparing in prostate HDR brachytherapy. We have developed a prostate HDR brachytherapy technology that integrates intraoperative TRUS‐based prostate contour into HDR treatment planning through TRUS‐CT deformable registration (TCDR) to improve prostate contour accuracy. In a perspective study of 16 patients, we investigated the clinical feasibility as well as the performance of this TCDR‐based HDR approach. We compared the performance of the TCDR‐based approach with the conventional CT‐based HDR in terms of prostate contour accuracy using MRI as the gold standard. For all patients, the average Dice prostate volume overlap was 91.1 ± 2.3% between the TCDR‐based and the MRI‐defined prostate volumes. In a subset of eight patients, inter and intro‐observer reliability study was conducted among three experienced physicians (two radiation oncologists and one radiologist) for the TCDR‐based HDR approach. Overall, a 10 to 40% improvement in prostate volume accuracy can be achieved with the TCDR‐based approach as compared with the conventional CT‐based prostate volumes. The TCDR‐based prostate volumes match closely to the MRI‐defined prostate volumes for all 3 observers (mean volume difference: 0.5 ± 7.2%, 1.8 ± 7.2%, and 3.5 ± 5.1%); while CT‐based contours overestimated prostate volumes by 10.9 ± 28.7%, 13.7 ± 20.1%, and 44.7 ± 32.1%. This study has shown that the TCDR‐based HDR brachytherapy is clinically feasible and can significantly improve prostate contour accuracy over the conventional CT‐based prostate contour. We also demonstrated the reliability of the TCDR‐based prostate delineation. This TCDR‐based HDR approach has the potential to enable accurate dose planning and delivery, and potentially enhance prostate HDR treatment outcome.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Improved prostate delineation in prostate HDR brachytherapy with TRUS‐CT deformable registration technology: A pilot study with MRI validation

Yang

Rossi

Jani

et al. 2017

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparison of multiparametric MRI‐based and transrectal ultrasound‐based preplans with intraoperative ultrasound‐based planning for low dose rate interstitial prostate seed implantation

Fredman

Traughber

Gross

et al. 2019

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Transrectal ultrasound images are routinely acquired for low dose rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy dosimetric preplanning (pTRUS), although diagnostic multiparametric magnetic resonance imaging (mpMRI) may serve this purpose as well. We compared the predictive abilities of TRUS vs MRI relative to intraoperative TRUS (iTRUS) to assess the role of mpMRI in brachytherapy preplanning. Materials and methods Retrospective analysis was performed on 32 patients who underwent iTRUS‐guided prostate LDR brachytherapy as either mono‐ or combination therapy. 56.3% had pTRUS‐only volume studies and 43.7% had both 3T‐mpMRI and pTRUS preplanning. MRI was used for preplanning and its image fusion with iTRUS was also used for intraoperative guidance of seed placement. Differences in gland volume, seed number, and activity and procedure time were examined, as well as the identification of lesions suspicious for tumor foci. Pearson correlation coefficient and Fisher's Z test were used to estimate associations between continuous measures. Results There was good correlation of planning volumes between iTRUS and either pTRUS or MRI (r = 0.89, r = 0.77), not impacted by the addition of hormonal therapy (P = 0.65, P = 0.33). Both consistently predicted intraoperative seed number (r = 0.87, r = 0.86). MRI/TRUS fusion did not significantly increase surgical or anesthesia time (P = 0.10, P = 0.46). mpMRI revealed suspicious focal lesions in 11 of 14 cases not visible on pTRUS, that when correlated with histopathology, were incorporated into the plan. Conclusions Relative to pTRUS, MRI yielded reliable preplanning measures, supporting the role of MRI‐only LDR treatment planning. mpMRI carries numerous diagnostic, staging and preplanning advantages that facilitate better patient selection and delivery of novel dose escalation and targeted therapy, with no additional surgical or anesthesia time. Prospective studies assessing its impact on treatment planning and delivery can serve to establish mpMRI as the standard of care in LDR prostate brachytherapy planning.

show abstract

MR‐guided prostate interventions

Tempany

Straus

Hata

et al. 2008

Magnetic Resonance Imaging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article the current issues of diagnosis and detection of prostate cancer are reviewed. The limitations for current techniques are highlighted and some possible solutions with MR imaging and MR-guided biopsy approaches are reviewed. There are several different biopsy approaches under investigation. These include transperineal open magnet approaches to closed-bore 1.5T transrectal biopsies. The imaging, image processing, and tracking methods are also discussed. In the arena of therapy, MR guidance has been used in conjunction with radiation methods, either brachytherapy or external delivery. The principles of the radiation treatment, the toxicities, and use of images are outlined. The future role of imaging and image-guided interventions lie with providing a noninvasive surrogate for cancer surveillance or monitoring treatment response. The shift to minimally invasive focal therapies has already begun and will be very exciting when MR-guided focused ultrasound surgery reaches its full potential.

show abstract

Prostate volume contouring: A 3D analysis of segmentation using 3DTRUS, CT, and MR

Cited by 186 publications

References 53 publications

Improved prostate delineation in prostate HDR brachytherapy with TRUS‐CT deformable registration technology: A pilot study with MRI validation

Improved prostate delineation in prostate HDR brachytherapy with TRUS‐CT deformable registration technology: A pilot study with MRI validation

Comparison of multiparametric MRI‐based and transrectal ultrasound‐based preplans with intraoperative ultrasound‐based planning for low dose rate interstitial prostate seed implantation

MR‐guided prostate interventions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About