Evaluation of Effective Parameters on Quality of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-computed Tomography Image Fusion in Head and Neck Tumors for Application in Treatment Planning

Shirvani, Atefeh; Jabbari, Keyvan; Amouheidari, Alireza

Evaluation of Effective Parameters on Quality of Magnetic Resonance Imaging-computed Tomography Image Fusion in Head and Neck Tumors for Application in Treatment Planning

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ Department of Medical Physics and Engineering, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

² Department of Radiation Oncology, Isfahan Milad Hospital, Isfahan, Iran

Abstract

Background: In radiation therapy, computed tomography (CT) simulation is used for treatment planning to define the location of tumor. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-CT image fusion leads to more efficient tumor contouring. This work tried to identify the practical issues for the combination of CT and MRI images in real clinical cases. The effect of various factors is evaluated on image fusion quality. Materials and Methods: In this study, the data of thirty patients with brain tumors were used for image fusion. The effect of several parameters on possibility and quality of image fusion was evaluated. These parameters include angles of the patient's head on the bed, slices thickness, slice gap, and height of the patient's head. Results: According to the results, the first dominating factor on quality of image fusion was the difference slice gap between CT and MRI images (cor = 0.86, P < 0.005) and second factor was the angle between CT and MRI slice in the sagittal plane (cor = 0.75, P < 0.005). In 20% of patients, this angle was more than 28° and image fusion was not efficient. In 17% of patients, difference slice gap in CT and MRI was >4 cm and image fusion quality was <25%. Conclusion: The most important problem in image fusion is that MRI images are taken without regard to their use in treatment planning. In general, parameters related to the patient position during MRI imaging should be chosen to be consistent with CT images of the patient in terms of location and angle.

Keywords

References

1.	Celejewska A, Tukiendorf A, Miszczyk L, Skladowski K, Wydmanski J, Trela-Janus K. Stereotactic radiotherapy in epithelial ovarian cancer brain metastases patients. J Ovarian Res 2014;7:79.
2.	Deorah S, Lynch CF, Sibenaller ZA, Ryken TC. Trends in brain cancer incidence and survival in the United States: Surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program, 1973 to 2001. Neurosurg Focus 2006;20:E1.
3.	Kohler BA, Ward E, McCarthy BJ, Schymura MJ, Ries LA, Eheman C, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2007, featuring tumors of the brain and other nervous system. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011;103:714-36. [PUBMED]
4.	Khan FM. The Physics of Radiation Therapy. 4^th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2010.
5.	Taylor RE. United Kingdom Children's Cancer Study Group (UKCCSG) radiotherapy and brain tumour groups: Medulloblastoma/PNET and craniospinal radiotherapy (CSRT): Report of a workshop held in Leeds, 30 June 1999. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2001;13:58-64. [PUBMED]
6.	Hoppe BS, Flampouri S, Su Z, Latif N, Dang NH, Lynch J, et al. Effective dose reduction to cardiac structures using protons compared with 3DCRT and IMRT in mediastinal Hodgkin lymphoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012;84:449-55. [PUBMED]
7.	Loos G, Paulon R, Verrelle P, Lapeyre M. Whole brain radiotherapy for brain metastases: The technique of irradiation influences the dose to parotid glands. Cancer Radiother 2012;16:136-9. [PUBMED]
8.	Moretto F, Rampino M, Munoz F, Ruo Redda MG, Reali A, Balcet V, et al. Conventional 2D (2DRT) and 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) versus intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for nasopharyngeal cancer treatment. Radiol Med 2014;119:634-41. [PUBMED]
9.	Sharma DS, Jalali R, Tambe CM, Animesh, Deshpande DD. Effect of tertiary multileaf collimator (MLC) on foetal dose during three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) of a brain tumour during pregnancy. Radiother Oncol 2004;70:49-54. [PUBMED]
10.	Trignani M, Genovesi D, Vinciguerra A, Di Pilla A, Augurio A, Di Tommaso M, et al. Parotid glands in whole-brain radiotherapy: 2D versus 3D technique for no sparing or sparing. Radiol Med 2015;120:324-8. [PUBMED]
11.	Bilger A, Milanovic D, Lorenz H, Oehlke O, Urbach H, Schmucker M, et al. Stereotactic fractionated radiotherapy of the resection cavity in patients with one to three brain metastases. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2016;142:81-6. [PUBMED]
12.	Halperin EC, Perez CA, Brady LW. Perez and Brady's Principles and Practice of Radiation Oncology. 5^th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2008.
13.	Cheng K, Montgomery D, Feng Y, Steel R, Liao H, McLaren DB, et al. Identifying radiotherapy target volumes in brain cancer by image analysis. Healthc Technol Lett 2015;2:123-8. [PUBMED]
14.	Sannazzari GL, Ragona R, Ruo Redda MG, Giglioli FR, Isolato G, Guarneri A. CT-MRI image fusion for delineation of volumes in three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy in the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Br J Radiol 2002;75:603-7. [PUBMED]
15.	Bentel GC, Nelson CE, Noell KT. Treatment Planning and dose Calculation in Radiation Oncology. 4^th ed. New York: Pergamon Press; 1989.
16.	Christensen EE, Curry TS, Dowdey JE, Murry RC. Christensen's Introduction to the Physics of Diagnostic Radiology. 3^rd ed. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger; 1984.
17.	Bushong SC. Radiologic Science for Technologists: Physics, Biology, and Protection. 8^th ed. St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Mosby; 2004.
18.	Abi-Jaoudeh N, Kruecker J, Kadoury S, Kobeiter H, Venkatesan AM, Levy E, et al. Multimodality image fusion-guided procedures: Technique, accuracy, and applications. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2012;35:986-98. [PUBMED]
19.	Appelbaum L, Mahgerefteh SY, Sosna J, Goldberg SN. Image-guided fusion and navigation: Applications in tumor ablation. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol 2013;16:287-95. [PUBMED]
20.	Giesel FL, Mehndiratta A, Locklin J, McAuliffe MJ, White S, Choyke PL, et al. Image fusion using CT, MRI and PET for treatment planning, navigation and follow up in percutaneous RFA. Exp Oncol 2009;31:106-14. [PUBMED]
21.	Haghighat MB, Aghagolzadeh A, Seyedarabi H. Multi-focus image fusion for visual sensor networks in DCT domain. Comput Electr Eng 2011;37:789-97.
22.	Mauri G, Cova L, De Beni S, Ierace T, Tondolo T, Cerri A, et al. Real-time US-CT/MRI image fusion for guidance of thermal ablation of liver tumors undetectable with US: Results in 295 cases. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 2015;38:143-51. [PUBMED]
23.	Gooding MJ, Rajpoot K, Mitchell S, Chamberlain P, Kennedy SH, Noble JA. Investigation into the fusion of multiple 4-D fetal echocardiography images to improve image quality. Ultrasound Med Biol 2010;36:957-66. [PUBMED]
24.	James AP, Dasarathy BV. Medical image fusion: A survey of the state of the art. Inf Fusion 2014;19:4-19.
25.	Maintz JB, Viergever MA. A survey of medical image registration. Med Image Anal 1998;2:1-36. [PUBMED]
26.	Hanvey S, Glegg M, Foster J. Magnetic resonance imaging for radiotherapy planning of brain cancer patients using immobilization and surface coils. Phys Med Biol 2009;54:5381-94. [PUBMED]
27.	Kao J, Darakchiev B, Conboy L, Ogurek S, Sharma N, Ren X, et al. Tumor directed, scalp sparing intensity modulated whole brain radiotherapy for brain metastases. Technol Cancer Res Treat 2015;14:547-55. [PUBMED]

Advanced Biomedical Research