Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Phys Med. 2014 May;30(3):301-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2013.09.001. Epub 2013 Oct 3.

Evaluation of the Block Matching deformable registration algorithm in the field of head-and-neck adaptive radiotherapy.

Author information

1
Université de Lorraine, CRAN, UMR 7039, 2, Avenue de la forêt de Haye, Vandoeuvre-Les-Nancy Cedex 54506, France; CNRS, CRAN, UMR 7039, France; Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine Alexis Vautrin, CLCC, Avenue de Bourgogne, Vandoeuvre-Les-Nancy Cedex 54511, France. Electronic address: s.huger@nancy.unicancer.fr.
2
Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine Alexis Vautrin, CLCC, Avenue de Bourgogne, Vandoeuvre-Les-Nancy Cedex 54511, France.
3
Dosisoft, Avenue Carnot, Cachan 94230, France.
4
Université de Lorraine, CRAN, UMR 7039, 2, Avenue de la forêt de Haye, Vandoeuvre-Les-Nancy Cedex 54506, France; CNRS, CRAN, UMR 7039, France.
5
Université de Lorraine, CRAN, UMR 7039, 2, Avenue de la forêt de Haye, Vandoeuvre-Les-Nancy Cedex 54506, France; CNRS, CRAN, UMR 7039, France; Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine Alexis Vautrin, CLCC, Avenue de Bourgogne, Vandoeuvre-Les-Nancy Cedex 54511, France.

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:

To compare the accuracy of the Block Matching deformable registration (DIR) against rigid image registration (RIR) for head-and-neck multi-modal images CT to cone-beam CT (CBCT) registration.

MATERIAL AND METHODS:

Planning-CT and weekly CBCT of 10 patients were used for this study. Several volumes, including medullary canal (MC), thyroid cartilage (TC), hyoid bone (HB) and submandibular gland (SMG) were transposed from CT to CBCT images using either DIR or RIR. Transposed volumes were compared with the manual delineation of these volumes on every CBCT. The parameters of similarity used for analysis were: Dice Similarity Index (DSI), 95%-Hausdorff Distance (95%-HD) and difference of volumes (cc).

RESULTS:

With DIR, the major mean difference of volumes was -1.4 cc for MC, revealing limited under-segmentation. DIR limited variability of DSI and 95%-HD. It significantly improved DSI for TC and HB and 95%-HD for all structures but SMG. With DIR, mean 95%-HD (mm) was 3.01 ± 0.80, 5.33 ± 2.51, 4.99 ± 1.69, 3.07 ± 1.31 for MC, TC, HB and SMG, respectively. With RIR, it was 3.92 ± 1.86, 6.94 ± 3.98, 6.44 ± 3.37 and 3.41 ± 2.25, respectively.

CONCLUSION:

Block Matching is a valid algorithm for deformable multi-modal CT to CBCT registration. Values of 95%-HD are useful for ongoing development of its application to the cumulative dose calculation.

KEYWORDS:

CT–CBCT registration; Deformable algorithm; Head and neck cancer

PMID:
24090743
DOI:
10.1016/j.ejmp.2013.09.001
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center