Dosimetric and geometric evaluation of an open low-field magnetic resonance simulator for radiotherapy treatment planning of brain tumours

Kristensen, Brian; Laursen, Finn; Løgager, Vibeke; Geertsen, Poul F.; Krarup-Hansen, Anders

doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2008.01.014

Cited by 46 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies conducted so far demonstrated that the use of bulk density in pelvis and brain is indeed a viable option. ( 9 – 14 ) The results of this study indicate that with IMRT treatments the same approach can be extended to HN region.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

“…( 9 – 16 ) To date, most of them have been limited to brain ( 9 – 12 ) and pelvis, ( 13 , 14 ) where there are relatively few inhomogeneities. The patient is either assumed to be homogeneous and water‐equivalent, or bone is contoured and assigned an appropriate density while the rest of the patient is assumed to be water‐equivalent.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparison of bulk electron density and voxel‐based electron density treatment planning

Karotki

Mah

Meijer

et al. 2011

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) alone for radiation planning is limited by the lack of electron density for dose calculations. The purpose of this work is to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy of using bulk electron density as a substitute for computed tomography (CT)‐derived electron density in intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning of head and neck (HN) cancers. Ten clinically‐approved, CT‐based IMRT treatment plans of HN cancer were used for this study. Three dose distributions were calculated and compared for each treatment plan. The first calculation used CT‐derived density and was assumed to be the most accurate. The second calculation used a homogeneous patient density of 1 g/cm3. For the third dose calculation, bone and air cavities were contoured and assigned a uniform density of 1.5 g/cm3 and 0 g/cm3, respectively. The remaining tissues were assigned a density of 1 g/cm3. The use of homogeneous anatomy resulted in up to 4%–5% deviations in dose distribution as compared to CT‐derived electron density calculations. Assigning bulk density to bone and air cavities significantly improved the accuracy of the dose calculations. All parameters used to describe planning target volume coverage were within 2% of calculations based on CT‐derived density. For organs at risk, most of the parameters were within 2%, with the few exceptions located in low‐dose regions. The data presented here show that if bone and air cavities are overridden with the proper density, it is feasible to use a bulk electron density approach for accurate dose calculation in IMRT treatment planning of HN cancers. This may overcome the problem of the lack of electron density information should MRI‐only simulation be performed.PACS number: 87.55.D‐

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 66%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of bulk electron density and voxel‐based electron density treatment planning

Karotki

Mah

Meijer

et al. 2011

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They have consequently used a homogenous geometry in the planning images as the basis for further dosimetric evaluations of MRI-based treatment plans. Lee et al [8] and Kristensen et al [9] have however performed more in depth investigations of the dosimetric effects of reducing tissue heterogeneity, by introducing a second tissue class in addition to water, i.e. bone, for radiation treatment planning of prostate cancer and brain tumors, respectively.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A simulation of MRI based dose calculations on the basis of radiotherapy planning CT images

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A systematic study using segmented MR images was undertaken. To achieve an acceptable accuracy in the CTV dose, the MR images should be segmented into bone and water equivalent tissue. Still, significant dose deviation for the organs at risk may be present. As tissue segmentation in real MR images is introduced, segmentation errors and errors that stem from geometrical non-linearities may further reduce the accuracy.

show abstract

“…[1][2][3][4] Instead, the entire workflow would be based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), thus eliminating systematic registration uncertainties between the MRI and CT 5,6 and simplifying the treatment chain. It is a difficult task to exclude the CT, since MRI does not contain information on electron density which is needed for dose calculations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computed tomography synthesis from magnetic resonance images in the pelvis using multiple random forests and auto-context features

Andreasen

Edmund

Zografos³

et al. 2016

SPIE Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dosimetric and geometric evaluation of an open low-field magnetic resonance simulator for radiotherapy treatment planning of brain tumours

Cited by 46 publications

References 12 publications

Comparison of bulk electron density and voxel‐based electron density treatment planning

Comparison of bulk electron density and voxel‐based electron density treatment planning

A simulation of MRI based dose calculations on the basis of radiotherapy planning CT images

Computed tomography synthesis from magnetic resonance images in the pelvis using multiple random forests and auto-context features

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About