Characterization of imaging performance of a novel helical kVCT for use in image‐guided and adaptive radiotherapy. Issue 6 (15th May 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Tegtmeier, Riley C.; Ferris, William S.; Bayouth, John E.; Miller, Jessica R.; Culberson, Wesley S.
• Is Part Of: Journal of applied clinical medical physics. Volume 23:Issue 6(2022)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2022-05-15
• Subjects: adaptive radiotherapy -- ClearRT -- computed tomography -- helical tomotherapy -- IGRT -- image quality -- Radixact; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; Health Physics; Clinical Medicine; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Internet Resources; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13648
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1526-9914

Abstract

Abstract: ClearRT helical kVCT imaging for the Radixact helical tomotherapy system recently received FDA approval and is available for clinical use. The system is intended to enhance image fidelity in radiation therapy treatment planning and delivery compared to the prior MV‐based onboard imaging approach. The purpose of this work was to characterize the imaging performance of this system and compare this performance with that of clinical systems used in image‐guided and/or adaptive radiotherapy (ART) or computed tomography (CT) simulation, including Radixact MVCT, TomoTherapy MVCT, Varian TrueBeam kV OBI CBCT, and the Siemens SOMATOM Definition Edge kVCT. A CT image quality phantom was scanned across clinically relevant acquisition modes for each system to evaluate image quality metrics, including noise, uniformity, contrast, spatial resolution, and CT number linearity. Similar noise levels were observed for ClearRT and Siemens Edge, whereas noise for the other systems was ∼1.5–5 times higher. Uniformity was best for Siemens Edge, whereas most scans for ClearRT exhibited a slight "cupping" or "capping" artifact. The ClearRT and Siemens Edge performed best for contrast metrics, which included low‐contrast visibility and contrast‐to‐noise ratio evaluations. Spatial resolution was best for TrueBeam and Siemens Edge, whereas the three kVCT systems exhibited similar CT number linearity. Overall, these results provide an initial indication that ClearRT image quality is adequate for image guidance in radiotherapy and sufficient for delineating anatomic structures, thus enabling its use for ART. ClearRT also showed significant improvement over MVCT, which was previously the only onboard imaging modality available on Radixact. Although the acquisition of these scans does come at the cost of additional patient dose, reported CTDI values indicate a similar or generally reduced machine output for ClearRT compared to the other systems while maintaining comparable or improved image quality overall.