Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2009 Jul 1;74(3):906-12.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.01.054.

Comparison of CT on rails with electronic portal imaging for positioning of prostate cancer patients with implanted fiducial markers

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Comparison of CT on rails with electronic portal imaging for positioning of prostate cancer patients with implanted fiducial markers

Rebecca Owen et al. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. .

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this investigation was to measure the agreement between in-room computed tomography (CT) on rails and electronic portal image (EPI) radiography.

Methods and materials: Agreement between the location of the center of gravity (COG) of fiducial markers (FMs) on CT and EPI images was determined in phantom studies and a patient cohort. A secondary analysis between the center of volume (COV) of the prostate on CT and the COG of FMs on CT and EPI was performed. Agreement was defined as the 95% probability of a difference of <or=3.0 mm between images. Systematic and random errors from CT and EPI are reported.

Results: From 8 patients, 254 CT and EPI pairs were analyzed. FMs were localized to within 3 mm on CT and EPI images 96.9% of the time in the left-right (LR) plane, 85.8% superior-inferior (SI), and 89% anterior-posterior (AP). The differences between the COV on CT and the COG on EPI were not within 3 mm in any plane: 87.8% (LR), 64.2% (SI), and 70.9% (AP). The systematic error varied from 1.2 to 2.9 mm (SI) and 1.8-2.9 mm (AP) between the COG on EPI and COV on CT.

Conclusions: Considerable differences between in-room CT and EPI exist. The phantom measurements showed slice thickness affected the accuracy of localization in the SI plane, and couch sag that occurs at the CT on rails gantry could not be totally corrected for in the AP plane. Other confounding factors are the action of rotating the couch and associated time lag between image acquisitions (prostate motion), EPI image quality, and outlining uncertainties.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types