Intrafraction esophageal motion in patients with clinical T1N0 esophageal cancer

Sekii, Shuhei; Ito, Yoshiaki; Harada, Ken; Kitaguchi, Mayuka; Takahashi, Kana; Inaba, Koji; Murakami, Naoya; Igaki, Hiroshi; Sasaki, Ryohei; Itami, Jun

doi:10.1016/j.rpor.2018.07.013

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Gao et al (2019) measured mean absolute magnitudes of oesophageal motion below 1 mm in all 3 dimensions. Median absolute maximum amplitudes from 1.9 mm to 2.4 mm anterior-posterior (AP), 1.0 mm to 1.8 mm left-right (LR) and 6.8 mm to 7.1 mm superior-inferior (SI ) were reported by Doi et al (2018), Sekii et al (2018), Yaremko et al (2008) and Kobayashi et al (2016). Slightly higher values yielded the study by Patel et al (2009) with 2.8 mm AP, 2.2 mm LR and 8 mm SI.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

“…In recent works the inter-patient oesophageal motion comparison was facilitated by means of comparing the average motion in predefined anatomical regions (Cohen et al 2010, Sekii et al 2018, Doi et al 2018 or only in the region around the tumor (Yaremko et al 2008. In this work we envisaged a method for a more detailed comparison on a voxel level.…”

Section: Oesophagus Motion Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Manual measurements in combination with rigid image alignment were used by Patel et al (2009). Sekii et al (2018) and Doi et al (2018) used fiducial markers to measure the oesophageal motion in 4DCT. The work by Doi et al (2018) differentiated between upper and lower region whereas Sekii et al (2018) analysed the motion separately for upper, middle and lower region.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Sekii et al (2018) and Doi et al (2018) used fiducial markers to measure the oesophageal motion in 4DCT. The work by Doi et al (2018) differentiated between upper and lower region whereas Sekii et al (2018) analysed the motion separately for upper, middle and lower region. Deformable image registration (DIR) was utilised by Palmer et al (2014) and Yaremko et al (2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the usage of fiducials can give very precise results for the location where the fiducial is placed, the deformation between fiducials needs to be estimated. Additionally, Sekii et al (2018) and Doi et al (2018) placed the fiducials only in the direct vicinity of oesophageal tumours, whereby no assertions about the whole organ can be made. Yaremko et al (2008) deformably registered maximum inhale and exhale phase and focused only on the tumour in the oesophagus.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Measuring breathing induced oesophageal motion and its dosimetric impact

Fechter,

Adebahr,

Grosu

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stereotactic body radiation therapy allows for a precise and accurate dose delivery. Organ motion during treatment bares the risk of undetected high dose healthy tissue exposure. An organ very susceptible to high dose is the oesophagus. Its low contrast on CT and the oblong shape renders motion estimation difficult. We tackle this issue by modern algorithms to measure the oesophageal motion voxel-wise and to estimate motion related dosimetric impact. Oesophageal motion was measured using deformable image registration and 4DCT of 11 internal and 5 public datasets. Current clinical practice of contouring the organ on 3DCT was compared to timely resolved 4DCT contours. The dosimetric impact of the motion was estimated by analysing the trajectory of each voxel in the 4D dose distribution. Finally an organ motion model was built, allowing for easier patient-wise comparisons. Motion analysis showed mean absolute maximal motion amplitudes of 4.24 ± 2.71 mm left-right, 4.81 ± 2.58 mm anterior-posterior and 10.21 ± 5.13 mm superior-inferior. Motion between the cohorts differed significantly. In around 50 % of the cases the dosimetric passing criteria was violated. Contours created on 3DCT did not cover 14 % of the organ for 50 % of the respiratory cycle and the 3D contour is around 38 % smaller than the union of all 4D contours. The motion model revealed that the maximal motion is not limited to the lower part of the organ. Our results showed motion amplitudes higher than most reported values in the literature and that motion is very heterogeneous across patients. Therefore, individual motion information should be considered in contouring and planning.

show abstract