Dose accumulation of multiple high dose rate prostate brachytherapy treatments in two commercially available image registration systems. (November 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Poder, Joel; Yuen, Johnson; Howie, Andrew; Bece, Andrej; Bucci, Joseph
• Is Part Of: Physica medica. Volume 43(2017)
• Page Start: 43
• Page End: 48
• Publication Date: 2017-11
• Subjects: High dose rate prostate brachytherapy -- Deformable image registration -- Dose accumulation; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Biophysics -- Periodicals; Biophysics -- Periodicals; Imagerie médicale -- Périodiques; Radiothérapie -- Périodiques; Rayons X -- Sécurité -- Mesures -- Périodiques; Physique -- Périodiques; Médecine -- Périodiques; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2017.10.015
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1120-1797

Abstract

Highlights: Dose accumulation of two high dose rate prostate brachytherapy fractions is proposed. Contour propagation using DIR is equivalent to inter-observer contouring variability. Dose accumulation through manual addition of DVH parameters may be sufficient. Abstract: Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess whether deformable image registration (DIR) is required for dose accumulation of multiple high dose rate prostate brachytherapy (HDRPBT) plans treated with the same catheter pattern on two different CT datasets. Method: DIR was applied to 20 HDRPBT patients' planning CT images who received two treatment fractions on sequential days, on two different CT datasets, with the same implant. Quality of DIR in Velocity and MIM image registration systems was assessed by calculating the Dice Similarity Coefficient (DSC) and mean distance to agreement (MDA) for the prostate, urethra and rectum contours. Accumulated doses from each system were then calculated using the same DIR technique and dose volume histogram (DVH) parameters compared to manual addition with no DIR. Results: The average DSC was found to be 0.83 (Velocity) and 0.84 (MIM), 0.80 (Velocity) and 0.80 (MIM), 0.80 (Velocity) and 0.81 (MIM), for the prostate, rectum and urethra contours, respectively. The average difference in calculated DVH parameters between the two systems using dose accumulation was less than 1%, and there was no statistically significant difference found between deformably accumulated doses in the two systems versus manual DVH addition with no DIR. Conclusion: Contour propagation using DIR in velocity and MIM was shown to be at least equivalent to inter-observer contouring variability on CT. The results also indicate that dose accumulation through manual addition of DVH parameters may be sufficient for HDRPBT treatments treated with the same catheter pattern on two different CT datasets.