Accuracy of applicator tip reconstruction in MRI-guided interstitial 192Ir-high-dose-rate brachytherapy of liver tumors. Issue 1 (April 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Wybranski, Christian; Eberhardt, Benjamin; Fischbach, Katharina; Fischbach, Frank; Walke, Mathias; Hass, Peter; Röhl, Friedrich-Wilhelm; Kosiek, Ortrud; Kaiser, Mandy; Pech, Maciej; Lüdemann, Lutz; Ricke, Jens
• Is Part Of: Radiotherapy and oncology. Volume 115:Issue 1(2015:Apr.)
• Page Start: 72
• Page End: 77
• Publication Date: 2015-04
• Subjects: MRI-guided intervention -- Interstitial 192Ir-high-dose-rate brachytherapy -- Liver tumors -- MRI-based treatment planning -- Applicator reconstruction accuracy -- Image registration; Oncology -- Periodicals; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Tumors -- Periodicals; Medical Oncology -- Periodicals; Neoplasms -- radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Radiotherapy -- Periodicals; Radiothérapie -- Périodiques; Cancérologie -- Périodiques; Tumeurs -- Périodiques; Electronic journals; 616.9940642
• DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2015.01.018
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0167-8140

Abstract

Abstract: Background and purpose: To evaluate the reconstruction accuracy of brachytherapy (BT) applicators tips in vitro and in vivo in MRI-guided 192 Ir-high-dose-rate (HDR)-BT of inoperable liver tumors. Materials and methods: Reconstruction accuracy of plastic BT applicators, visualized by nitinol inserts, was assessed in MRI phantom measurements and in MRI 192 Ir-HDR-BT treatment planning datasets of 45 patients employing CT co-registration and vector decomposition. Conspicuity, short-term dislocation, and reconstruction errors were assessed in the clinical data. The clinical effect of applicator reconstruction accuracy was determined in follow-up MRI data. Results: Applicator reconstruction accuracy was 1.6 ± 0.5 mm in the phantom measurements. In the clinical MRI datasets applicator conspicuity was rated good/optimal in ⩾72% of cases. 16/129 applicators showed not time dependent deviation in between MRI/CT acquisition ( p > 0.1). Reconstruction accuracy was 5.5 ± 2.8 mm, and the average image co-registration error was 3.1 ± 0.9 mm. Vector decomposition revealed no preferred direction of reconstruction errors. In the follow-up data deviation of planned dose distribution and irradiation effect was 6.9 ± 3.3 mm matching the mean co-registration error (6.5 ± 2.5 mm; p > 0.1). Conclusion: Applicator reconstruction accuracy in vitro conforms to AAPM TG 56 standard. Nitinol-inserts are feasible for applicator visualization and yield good conspicuity in MRI treatment planning data. No preferred direction of reconstruction errors were found in vivo.