Comprehensive Image Quality Evaluation and Motion Phantom Studies of an Ultra-Fast (6-Second) Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Imaging System on a Ring Gantry Linear Accelerator

IF 2.2 Q3 ONCOLOGY

Advances in Radiation Oncology Pub Date : 2025-02-01 DOI:10.1016/j.adro.2024.101681

Hui Zhao PhD , Geoff Nelson PhD , Vikren Sarkar PhD , Courtney Oare PhD , Martin Szegedi , Sara St. James PhD , Jeremy Kunz PhD , Ryan Price PhD , Y. Jessica Huang PhD

{"title":"Comprehensive Image Quality Evaluation and Motion Phantom Studies of an Ultra-Fast (6-Second) Cone-Beam Computed Tomography Imaging System on a Ring Gantry Linear Accelerator","authors":"Hui Zhao PhD , Geoff Nelson PhD , Vikren Sarkar PhD , Courtney Oare PhD , Martin Szegedi , Sara St. James PhD , Jeremy Kunz PhD , Ryan Price PhD , Y. Jessica Huang PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.adro.2024.101681","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><div>To evaluate the image quality of an ultrafast cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) system—Varian HyperSight.</div></div><div><h3>Methods and Materials</h3><div>In this evaluation, 5 studies were performed to assess the image quality of HyperSight CBCT. First, a HyperSight CBCT image quality evaluation was performed and compared with Siemens simulation-CT and Varian TrueBeam CBCT. Second, a visual comparison of image quality among simulation-CTs, HyperSight CBCT, and TrueBeam CBCT was performed for a patient with head and neck cancer and patients with metal dental fillings and prostheses. Third, the Hounsfield unit (HU) versus electron density curve of HyperSight CBCT was compared with GE and Siemens simulation CTs. Fourth, Siemens simulation-CT and HyperSight CBCT scans were acquired on the Catphan set-up at different locations inside the bore (±10 cm in all 3 principal directions from the center), and the HU variations for different materials were evaluated. Fifth, a 4-dimensional lung tumor phantom study was performed to assess moving tumor alignment during image registration.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Significant improvement of image contrast, HU constancy, and noise level on HyperSight CBCT was observed compared with TrueBeam CBCT. Significant image quality improvement was observed on HyperSight CBCT for patients with dental fillings and prostheses compared with simulation-CT without metal artifact reduction. The linear fit trendline of HU versus electron density curves for GE simulation-CT, Siemens simulation-CT, and HyperSight CBCT showed a 0.6% difference for HU values below 2000. The maximum HU difference for HyperSight CBCT when Catphan was positioned within ±10 cm in all 3 principal directions was ≤ 98 on bone 50%, ≤ 29 other than bone, and was ≤ 31 on bone 50%, and ≤ 17 other than bone for Siemens simulation-CT. Both tumor shape and tumor alignment discrepancies on CBCT scans were observed in a 4-dimensional phantom study.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>This evaluation shows significant image improvement of HyperSight CBCT over conventional CBCT on image contrast, HU constancy, and noise level with scatter correction and metal artifact reduction reconstruction methods. HyperSight CBCT has similar image quality to simulation-CTs and shows the potential application for treatment planning. The rapid acquisition of HyperSight CBCT showed both tumor shape and tumor alignment discrepancies of moving targets. Careful considerations of patient respiratory motion monitoring and target matching are highly recommended.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":7390,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","volume":"10 2","pages":"Article 101681"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11665466/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2452109424002446","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the image quality of an ultrafast cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) system—Varian HyperSight.

Methods and Materials

In this evaluation, 5 studies were performed to assess the image quality of HyperSight CBCT. First, a HyperSight CBCT image quality evaluation was performed and compared with Siemens simulation-CT and Varian TrueBeam CBCT. Second, a visual comparison of image quality among simulation-CTs, HyperSight CBCT, and TrueBeam CBCT was performed for a patient with head and neck cancer and patients with metal dental fillings and prostheses. Third, the Hounsfield unit (HU) versus electron density curve of HyperSight CBCT was compared with GE and Siemens simulation CTs. Fourth, Siemens simulation-CT and HyperSight CBCT scans were acquired on the Catphan set-up at different locations inside the bore (±10 cm in all 3 principal directions from the center), and the HU variations for different materials were evaluated. Fifth, a 4-dimensional lung tumor phantom study was performed to assess moving tumor alignment during image registration.

Results

Significant improvement of image contrast, HU constancy, and noise level on HyperSight CBCT was observed compared with TrueBeam CBCT. Significant image quality improvement was observed on HyperSight CBCT for patients with dental fillings and prostheses compared with simulation-CT without metal artifact reduction. The linear fit trendline of HU versus electron density curves for GE simulation-CT, Siemens simulation-CT, and HyperSight CBCT showed a 0.6% difference for HU values below 2000. The maximum HU difference for HyperSight CBCT when Catphan was positioned within ±10 cm in all 3 principal directions was ≤ 98 on bone 50%, ≤ 29 other than bone, and was ≤ 31 on bone 50%, and ≤ 17 other than bone for Siemens simulation-CT. Both tumor shape and tumor alignment discrepancies on CBCT scans were observed in a 4-dimensional phantom study.

Conclusions

This evaluation shows significant image improvement of HyperSight CBCT over conventional CBCT on image contrast, HU constancy, and noise level with scatter correction and metal artifact reduction reconstruction methods. HyperSight CBCT has similar image quality to simulation-CTs and shows the potential application for treatment planning. The rapid acquisition of HyperSight CBCT showed both tumor shape and tumor alignment discrepancies of moving targets. Careful considerations of patient respiratory motion monitoring and target matching are highly recommended.

查看原文本刊更多论文

环形龙门直线加速器上超快（6秒）锥束计算机断层成像系统的综合图像质量评价和运动幻影研究。

目的：评价超快锥束计算机断层扫描（CBCT）系统varian HyperSight的图像质量。方法和材料：在本评价中，进行了5项研究来评估HyperSight CBCT的图像质量。首先，进行HyperSight CBCT图像质量评估，并与Siemens simulation-CT和Varian TrueBeam CBCT进行比较。其次，对一名头颈癌患者和使用金属牙填充物和假体的患者进行模拟ct、HyperSight CBCT和TrueBeam CBCT的图像质量进行视觉比较。第三，将HyperSight CBCT的Hounsfield单位（HU）与电子密度曲线与GE和Siemens模拟ct进行比较。第四，在井眼内不同位置（距中心所有3个主要方向±10厘米）的Catphan装置上获取西门子模拟ct和HyperSight CBCT扫描，并评估不同材料的HU变化。第五，进行了一个四维肺肿瘤幻象研究，以评估图像配准过程中移动肿瘤的对齐。结果：与TrueBeam CBCT相比，HyperSight CBCT的图像对比度、HU稳定性和噪声水平均有显著改善。与未减少金属伪影的模拟ct相比，使用HyperSight CBCT对补牙和假体患者的图像质量有显著改善。GE模拟ct、Siemens模拟ct和HyperSight CBCT的HU与电子密度曲线的线性拟合趋势线显示，2000以下的HU值差异为0.6%。当Catphan在3个主要方向定位在±10 cm范围内时，HyperSight CBCT最大HU差值为50%骨≤98，非骨≤29,50%骨≤31，非骨≤17。在一个四维幻影研究中观察到CBCT扫描上的肿瘤形状和肿瘤排列差异。结论：通过散点校正和金属伪影减少重建方法，HyperSight CBCT在图像对比度、HU稳定性和噪声水平上比传统CBCT有显著改善。HyperSight CBCT具有与模拟ct相似的图像质量，并显示出治疗计划的潜在应用。HyperSight CBCT的快速采集显示了运动目标的肿瘤形状和肿瘤排列差异。强烈建议仔细考虑患者呼吸运动监测和目标匹配。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Advances in Radiation Oncology Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging

CiteScore

4.60

自引率

4.30%

发文量

208

审稿时长

98 days

期刊介绍： The purpose of Advances is to provide information for clinicians who use radiation therapy by publishing: Clinical trial reports and reanalyses. Basic science original reports. Manuscripts examining health services research, comparative and cost effectiveness research, and systematic reviews. Case reports documenting unusual problems and solutions. High quality multi and single institutional series, as well as other novel retrospective hypothesis generating series. Timely critical reviews on important topics in radiation oncology, such as side effects. Articles reporting the natural history of disease and patterns of failure, particularly as they relate to treatment volume delineation. Articles on safety and quality in radiation therapy. Essays on clinical experience. Articles on practice transformation in radiation oncology, in particular: Aspects of health policy that may impact the future practice of radiation oncology. How information technology, such as data analytics and systems innovations, will change radiation oncology practice. Articles on imaging as they relate to radiation therapy treatment.