Abstract：Objective To compare the results of three different registration methods in the kilovolt CBCT guided IMRT for nasopharyngeal cancer (NPC). Methods Total 560 CBCT images of 24 NPC patients who received kilovolt CBCT guided IMRT were analyzed off line. Three registration methods were used for alignment between CBCT and planning CT, including translational and rotational errors for bone and grey (BoneT+R,GreyT+R),only translational errors for grey (GreyT). The registration results were analyzed by mean paired t-test respectively. Results With method BoneT+R, the translational errors on x, y and z axes were (－0.11±1.35) mm,(0.40±2.09) mm and (0.95±1.56) mm and the rotational errors were 1.06°±0.67°, 0.01°±1.28° and 0.92°±1.00° respectively. With GreyT+R, the translational errors on x, y and z axes were (－0.02±1.06) mm,(0.68±1.92) mm and (0.81±1.46) mm and the rotational errors were 0.85°±0.61°, －0.05°±1.32° and 0.91°±0.72° respectively. With GreyT, the translational errors on x, y and z axes were (0.58±1.02),( 0.52±1.89) and (0.44±1.43) mm. The results of compared mean t-test for different registration methods groups have significant difference (P=0.00—0.01) except for the rotational errors on y and z axes between BoneT+R and GreyT+R (P=0.05,0.62). ConclusionsThere have different alignment errors when different registration methods used for NPC kilovolt CBCT guided radiotherapy. If there have correct methods for rotation errors, GreyT+R registration method may be a better choice. In opposite, GreyT+R registration method would be used firstly to verify whether the rotational error>2°or 3°. If the rotational error>2°or 3°,the patient should be re-setup. If not,according to these alignment results, the GreyT method, manual method would be used to compensate the translational errors.
Li Xiaoyu,Zhou Jidan,Zhong Renming et al. Compare the registration results with different registration methods in cone beam CT guided radiotherapy for nasopharyngeal carcinoma[J]. Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology, 2014, 23(4): 340-343.
[1] MundtAJ, Roeske JC. Intensity modulated radiation therapy:a clinical perspective[M]. London:BC Decker Inc,2005:8-9. [2] 廖雄飞,王运来,葛瑞刚,等.影像引导放疗中千伏特锥形束CT患者剂量的测量[J].中华放射肿瘤学杂志,2009,18:405-408. [3] 张玉海,夏火生,高杨.不同图像引导方式在头颈部肿瘤中成像剂量测量[J].中国医疗器械杂志,2010,34:455-457. [4] Sharma SD, Dongre P, Mhatre V, et al. Evaluation of automated image registration algorithm for image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT)[J].Australas Phys Eng Sci Med,2012,35:311-319. [5] Lawson JD, Schreibmann E, Jani AB, et al. Quantitative evaluation of a cone-beam computed tomography-planning computed tomography deformable image registration method for adaptive radiation therapy[J].J Appl Clin Med Phys,2007,8:2432. [6] Thilmann C, Nill S, Tucking T,et al. Correction of patient positioning errors based on in-line cone beam CTs:clinical implementation and first experiences[J].Radiat Oncol,2006,1:16-27. [7] 王多明,花蓓蓓,谭遥,等.应用锥形束CT评估鼻咽癌调强放疗中的摆位误差[J].新疆医科大学学报,2012,35:263-268. [8] Ingrosso G, Miceli R, Fedele D, et al. Cone-beam computed tomography in hypofractionated stereotactic radiotherapy forbrain metastases[J].Radiat Oncol,2012,7:54-63. [9] 王永刚,陈宏,刘跃,等.不同匹配方式对鼻咽癌IGRT摆位误差的影响[J].现代肿瘤学,2010,18:688-689. [10] 刘均,陈宏,陈飞,等.图像引导鼻咽癌调强放疗摆位误差及剂量学验证研究[J].中国医学物理学杂志,2011,28:2334-2337. [11] Guckenberger M, Meyer J, Vordermark D, et al. Magnitudeand clinical relevanceof translational and rotational patientsetup errors a cone-beam CT study[J]. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys,2006,65:934-942. [12] Weihua Fu, Yang Y, Ning J, et al. Dosimetric influences of rotational setup errors on head and neck carcinoma intensity-modulated radiation therapy treatments[J]. Med Dosimetry,2013,38:125-132. [13] van Beek S, van Kranen S, Mencarelli A, et al. First clinical experience with a multiple region of interest registration and correction method in radiotherapy of head-and-neck cancer patients[J]. Radiother Oncol,2010,94:213-217.
2014, Vol. 23 
