No abstract

Introduction:Stereotactic hypofractionated radiotherapy is an effective treatment for brain metastases in oligometastatic patients. Its planning is however time-consuming because of the number of organs at risk to be manually segmented. This study evaluates 2 automated segmentation commercial software.Methods:Patients were scanned in the treatment position. The computed tomography scan was registered on a magnetic resonance imaging and volumes were manually segmented by a clinician. Then 2 automated segmentations were performed (with iPlan and Smart Segmentation). RT STRUCT files were compared with Aquilab’s Artistruct segment comparison module. We selected common segmented volume ratio as the main judging criterion. Secondary criteria were Dice-Sørensen coefficients, overlap ratio, and additional segmented volume.Results:Twenty consecutive patients were included. Agreement between manual and automated contouring was poor. Common segmented volumes ranged from 7.71% to 82.54%, Dice-Sørensen coefficient ranged from 0.0745 to 0.8398, overlap ratio ranged from 0.0414 to 0.7275, and additional segmented volume ranged from 9.80% to 92.25%. Each software outperformed the other on some organs while performing worse on others.Conclusion:No software seemed clearly better than the other. Common segmented volumes were much too low for routine use in stereotactic hypofractionated brain radiotherapy. Manual editing is still needed.

No abstract

No abstract