Comparison of localization techniques for prostate radiotherapy

R. D. Foster, E. Papiez, T. D. Solberg

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

The aim of this study is to compare three methodologies of prostate localization. Daily prostate localization using cone beam CT (CBCT) or orthogonal kV imaging has been performed at UT Southwestern Medical Center since 2006. Prostate patients are implanted with gold seeds, which are matched with the planning CT or DRR before treatment. More recently, a technology using electromagnetic transponders implanted within the prostate was introduced into our clinic (Calypso®). With each technology, patients are localized initially using skin marks and the room lasers. In this study, patients were localized with Calypso and either CBCT or kV orthogonal images in the same treatment session, allowing a head-to-head comparison of the technologies. Localization difference distributions were determined from the difference in the offsets determined by CBCT/kV imaging and Calypso. CBCT-Calypso and kV imaging-Calypso localization data were summarized from over 160 and 100 fractions each, respectively. In these patients, the differences between CBCT-Calypso and kV imaging-Calypso localizations are 0.31 ± 1.82 mm, 0.00 ± 1.00 mm, -0.28 ±1.36 mm and 0.28 ± 4.12 mm, -0.28 ± 3.22 mm, 0.16 ± 1.61 mm, respectively, in the AP, SI, and RL directions. These results show excellent agreement between radiographic localization techniques and electromagnetic transponders, indicating that each of the localization techniques is accurate and suitable for prostate localization. Mean absolute localization offsets for kV imaging patients localized with Calypso are 6.98 ± 4.02 mm, 2.06 ± 3.09 mm, and 0.78 ± 3.06 mm in the AP, SI, and RL directions, indicating that the prostate is displaced approximately 7 mm posteriorly and 2 mm inferiorly when compared to localization with skin marks.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationIFMBE Proceedings
Pages784-787
Number of pages4
Volume25
Edition1
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009
EventWorld Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering: Radiation Oncology - Munich, Germany
Duration: Sep 7 2009Sep 12 2009

Other

OtherWorld Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering: Radiation Oncology
CountryGermany
CityMunich
Period9/7/099/12/09

Fingerprint

Radiotherapy
Cones
Imaging techniques
Transponders
Skin
Seed
Gold
thiacloprid
Planning
Lasers

Keywords

  • Conebeam CT
  • Electromagnetic transponders
  • Localization
  • Prostate

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Bioengineering

Cite this

Foster, R. D., Papiez, E., & Solberg, T. D. (2009). Comparison of localization techniques for prostate radiotherapy. In IFMBE Proceedings (1 ed., Vol. 25, pp. 784-787) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03474-9-221

Comparison of localization techniques for prostate radiotherapy. / Foster, R. D.; Papiez, E.; Solberg, T. D.

IFMBE Proceedings. Vol. 25 1. ed. 2009. p. 784-787.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Foster, RD, Papiez, E & Solberg, TD 2009, Comparison of localization techniques for prostate radiotherapy. in IFMBE Proceedings. 1 edn, vol. 25, pp. 784-787, World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering: Radiation Oncology, Munich, Germany, 9/7/09. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03474-9-221
Foster RD, Papiez E, Solberg TD. Comparison of localization techniques for prostate radiotherapy. In IFMBE Proceedings. 1 ed. Vol. 25. 2009. p. 784-787 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03474-9-221
Foster, R. D. ; Papiez, E. ; Solberg, T. D. / Comparison of localization techniques for prostate radiotherapy. IFMBE Proceedings. Vol. 25 1. ed. 2009. pp. 784-787
@inproceedings{125aaf337aff4eadb25c33e590293e36,
title = "Comparison of localization techniques for prostate radiotherapy",
abstract = "The aim of this study is to compare three methodologies of prostate localization. Daily prostate localization using cone beam CT (CBCT) or orthogonal kV imaging has been performed at UT Southwestern Medical Center since 2006. Prostate patients are implanted with gold seeds, which are matched with the planning CT or DRR before treatment. More recently, a technology using electromagnetic transponders implanted within the prostate was introduced into our clinic (Calypso{\circledR}). With each technology, patients are localized initially using skin marks and the room lasers. In this study, patients were localized with Calypso and either CBCT or kV orthogonal images in the same treatment session, allowing a head-to-head comparison of the technologies. Localization difference distributions were determined from the difference in the offsets determined by CBCT/kV imaging and Calypso. CBCT-Calypso and kV imaging-Calypso localization data were summarized from over 160 and 100 fractions each, respectively. In these patients, the differences between CBCT-Calypso and kV imaging-Calypso localizations are 0.31 ± 1.82 mm, 0.00 ± 1.00 mm, -0.28 ±1.36 mm and 0.28 ± 4.12 mm, -0.28 ± 3.22 mm, 0.16 ± 1.61 mm, respectively, in the AP, SI, and RL directions. These results show excellent agreement between radiographic localization techniques and electromagnetic transponders, indicating that each of the localization techniques is accurate and suitable for prostate localization. Mean absolute localization offsets for kV imaging patients localized with Calypso are 6.98 ± 4.02 mm, 2.06 ± 3.09 mm, and 0.78 ± 3.06 mm in the AP, SI, and RL directions, indicating that the prostate is displaced approximately 7 mm posteriorly and 2 mm inferiorly when compared to localization with skin marks.",
keywords = "Conebeam CT, Electromagnetic transponders, Localization, Prostate",
author = "Foster, {R. D.} and E. Papiez and Solberg, {T. D.}",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1007/978-3-642-03474-9-221",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9783642034725",
volume = "25",
pages = "784--787",
booktitle = "IFMBE Proceedings",
edition = "1",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Comparison of localization techniques for prostate radiotherapy

AU - Foster, R. D.

AU - Papiez, E.

AU - Solberg, T. D.

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - The aim of this study is to compare three methodologies of prostate localization. Daily prostate localization using cone beam CT (CBCT) or orthogonal kV imaging has been performed at UT Southwestern Medical Center since 2006. Prostate patients are implanted with gold seeds, which are matched with the planning CT or DRR before treatment. More recently, a technology using electromagnetic transponders implanted within the prostate was introduced into our clinic (Calypso®). With each technology, patients are localized initially using skin marks and the room lasers. In this study, patients were localized with Calypso and either CBCT or kV orthogonal images in the same treatment session, allowing a head-to-head comparison of the technologies. Localization difference distributions were determined from the difference in the offsets determined by CBCT/kV imaging and Calypso. CBCT-Calypso and kV imaging-Calypso localization data were summarized from over 160 and 100 fractions each, respectively. In these patients, the differences between CBCT-Calypso and kV imaging-Calypso localizations are 0.31 ± 1.82 mm, 0.00 ± 1.00 mm, -0.28 ±1.36 mm and 0.28 ± 4.12 mm, -0.28 ± 3.22 mm, 0.16 ± 1.61 mm, respectively, in the AP, SI, and RL directions. These results show excellent agreement between radiographic localization techniques and electromagnetic transponders, indicating that each of the localization techniques is accurate and suitable for prostate localization. Mean absolute localization offsets for kV imaging patients localized with Calypso are 6.98 ± 4.02 mm, 2.06 ± 3.09 mm, and 0.78 ± 3.06 mm in the AP, SI, and RL directions, indicating that the prostate is displaced approximately 7 mm posteriorly and 2 mm inferiorly when compared to localization with skin marks.

AB - The aim of this study is to compare three methodologies of prostate localization. Daily prostate localization using cone beam CT (CBCT) or orthogonal kV imaging has been performed at UT Southwestern Medical Center since 2006. Prostate patients are implanted with gold seeds, which are matched with the planning CT or DRR before treatment. More recently, a technology using electromagnetic transponders implanted within the prostate was introduced into our clinic (Calypso®). With each technology, patients are localized initially using skin marks and the room lasers. In this study, patients were localized with Calypso and either CBCT or kV orthogonal images in the same treatment session, allowing a head-to-head comparison of the technologies. Localization difference distributions were determined from the difference in the offsets determined by CBCT/kV imaging and Calypso. CBCT-Calypso and kV imaging-Calypso localization data were summarized from over 160 and 100 fractions each, respectively. In these patients, the differences between CBCT-Calypso and kV imaging-Calypso localizations are 0.31 ± 1.82 mm, 0.00 ± 1.00 mm, -0.28 ±1.36 mm and 0.28 ± 4.12 mm, -0.28 ± 3.22 mm, 0.16 ± 1.61 mm, respectively, in the AP, SI, and RL directions. These results show excellent agreement between radiographic localization techniques and electromagnetic transponders, indicating that each of the localization techniques is accurate and suitable for prostate localization. Mean absolute localization offsets for kV imaging patients localized with Calypso are 6.98 ± 4.02 mm, 2.06 ± 3.09 mm, and 0.78 ± 3.06 mm in the AP, SI, and RL directions, indicating that the prostate is displaced approximately 7 mm posteriorly and 2 mm inferiorly when compared to localization with skin marks.

KW - Conebeam CT

KW - Electromagnetic transponders

KW - Localization

KW - Prostate

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77950424929&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77950424929&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/978-3-642-03474-9-221

DO - 10.1007/978-3-642-03474-9-221

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:77950424929

SN - 9783642034725

VL - 25

SP - 784

EP - 787

BT - IFMBE Proceedings

ER -