Till Örebro universitet

Background: Most patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma are young and have a favourable prognosis, therefore it is of high importance to decrease the radiation doses to normal tissues received during radiotherapy. A combination of proton therapy and deep inspiration breath-hold technique (DIBH) can improve the sparing effect and thereby reduce the risk of late effects.

Case presentation: The two first patient cases treated with proton therapy in DIBH at the Skandion Clinic, Uppsala, Sweden, are presented here. Proton treatment plans were compared to photon plans based on doses to target and organs at risk. Several CT scans were acquired during the treatment course and inter breath-hold variations were evaluated based on anatomical distances and dosimetric comparisons.

Conclusions: The results from our first patients treated with proton therapy in DIBH imply that the treatment strategy is robust and has the potential to reduce dose to normal tissue.

PURPOSE: To evaluate two commercial CT metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithms for use in proton treatment planning in the head and neck (H&N) area.

METHODS: An anthropomorphic head phantom with removable metallic implants (dental fillings or neck implant) was CT-scanned to evaluate the O-MAR (Philips) and the iMAR (Siemens) algorithms. Reference images were acquired without any metallic implants in place. Water equivalent thickness (WET) was calculated for different path directions and compared between image sets. Images were also evaluated for use in proton treatment planning for parotid, tonsil, tongue base, and neck node targets. The beams were arranged so as to not traverse any metal prior to the target, enabling evaluation of the impact on dose calculation accuracy from artifacts surrounding the metal volume. Plans were compared based on γ analysis (1 mm distance-to-agreement/1% difference in local dose) and dose volume histogram metrics for targets and organs at risk (OARs). Visual grading evaluation of 30 dental implant patient MAR images was performed by three radiation oncologists.

RESULTS: In the dental fillings images, ΔWET along a low-density streak was reduced from -17.0 to -4.3 mm with O-MAR and from -16.1 mm to -2.3 mm with iMAR, while for other directions the deviations were increased or approximately unchanged when the MAR algorithms were used. For the neck implant images, ΔWET was generally reduced with MAR but residual deviations remained (of up to -2.3 mm with O-MAR and of up to -1.5 mm with iMAR). The γ analysis comparing proton dose distributions for uncorrected/MAR plans and corresponding reference plans showed passing rates >98% of the voxels for all phantom plans. However, substantial dose differences were seen in areas of most severe artifacts (γ passing rates of down to 89% for some cases). MAR reduced the deviations in some cases, but not for all plans. For a single patient case dosimetrically evaluated, minor dose differences were seen between the uncorrected and MAR plans (γ passing rate approximately 97%). The visual grading of patient images showed that MAR significantly improved image quality (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS: O-MAR and iMAR significantly improved image quality in terms of anatomical visualization for target and OAR delineation in dental implant patient images. WET calculations along several directions, all outside the metallic regions, showed that both uncorrected and MAR images contained metal artifacts which could potentially lead to unacceptable errors in proton treatment planning. ΔWET was reduced by MAR in some areas, while increased or unchanged deviations were seen for other path directions. The proton treatment plans created for the phantom images showed overall acceptable dose distributions differences when compared to the reference cases, both for the uncorrected and MAR images. However, substantial dose distribution differences in the areas of most severe artifacts were seen for some plans, which were reduced by MAR in some cases but not all. In conclusion, MAR could be beneficial to use for proton treatment planning; however, case-by-case evaluations of the metal artifact-degraded images are always recommended.

Degradation of image quality by metal artifacts is a common problem in computed tomography (CT) imaging, which can limit the diagnostic value of a CT examination and also introduce inaccuracies in radiotherapy (RT) treatment planning. In recent years, commercial metal artifact reduction (MAR) methods have been launched by several CT vendors. The overall aim of this thesis was to evaluate MAR methods in diagnostic imaging and RT treatment planning.

Evaluations of hip prosthesis phantom CT images showed that MAR algorithms in general improved image quality, based on both visual grading analysis and quantitative measures, while the application of virtual monoenergetic reconstructions insufficiently reduced metal artifacts. In some cases additional artifacts were introduced by the MAR algorithms. MAR algorithms were also evaluated in hip prosthesis phantom CT imaging used for proton therapy treatment planning, where improvements in dose calculation accuracy were observed.

Studies of Head & Neck (H&N) implant CT images in RT treatment planning were also performed. By visual grading of anatomy visualization with respect to target delineation in dental implant patient images, MAR algorithms were shown to significantly improve image quality. However, only minor effects of H&N implant artifacts on proton dose distributions were seen. The impact might be greater for more severe artifacts than those studied here, and thus further investigations of such cases are needed.

In conclusion, MAR algorithms have been shown to enhance image quality for diagnostic applications and to improve anatomy visualization in RT treatment planning. The MAR algorithms led to increased proton dose calculation accuracy in some cases, while in other situations only minor changes were seen.

Purpose: To evaluate for proton therapy treatment planning the feasibility of two commercial metal artifact reduction (MAR) algorithms in CT-imaging.

Materials and Methods: A head phantom with removable dental fillings and a body phantom with a removable hip prosthesis were scanned to evaluate O-MAR (Philips) and iMAR (Siemens). Reference images (scans without metal) were acquired and subtracted from the uncorrected (no MAR) and MAR-images. CT number-differences were mapped to differences in stopping power ratios to water. In addition, proton treatment plans for a parotid, tonsil and prostate-target were optimized based on uncorrected and MAR images and recalculated on reference images. Beams were arranged to not traverse metal, enabling evaluation of metal artifact impact on target coverage.

Results: MAR algorithms reduced the most extreme dental filling artifacts, but residual artifacts still remained. iMAR reduced hip prosthesis artifacts to large extent, while considerable artifacts still were present with O-MAR. For parotid and tonsil-plans, D98%to PTV was nearly intact in the reference recalculations for both uncorrected and MAR-based plans, with maximum-difference,0.3%. For uncorrected prostate plans, D98%decreased more than 4% in the reference recalculation. For the iMAR prostate plan, D98%was almost identical in the reference recalculation (97.5% versus 97.4%). A slight D98%-decrease was seen in the reference for the O-MAR based plan (96.8% versus 97.5%).

Conclusion: Hip prosthesis artifacts reduced target coverage accuracy, but it was substantially improved with MAR algorithms. Dental filling artifacts were moderately reduced with MAR, but did not substantially affect target coverage

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate commercial metal artefact reduction (MAR) techniques in X-ray CT imaging of hip prostheses.

Methods: Monoenergetic reconstructions of dual-energy CT (DECT) data and several different MAR algorithms, combined with single-energy CT or DECT, were evaluated by imaging a bilateral hip prosthesis phantom. The MAR images were compared with uncorrected images based on CT number accuracy and noise in different regions of interest.

Results: The three MAR algorithms studied implied a general noise reduction (up to 67%, 74% and 77%) and an improvement in CT number accuracy, both in regions close to the prostheses and between the two prostheses. The application of monoenergetic reconstruction, without any MAR algorithm, did not decrease the noise in the regions close to the prostheses to the same extent as did the MAR algorithms and even increased the noise in the region between the prostheses.

Conclusion: The MAR algorithms evaluated generally improved CT number accuracy and substantially reduced the noise in the hip prostheses phantom images, both close to the prostheses and between the two prostheses. The study showed that the monoenergetic reconstructions evaluated did not sufficiently reduce the severe metal artefact caused by large orthopaedic implants.

Advances in knowledge: This study evaluates several commercially available MAR techniques in CT imaging of large orthopaedic implants.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate metal artifact reduction (MAR) techniques, provided by four vendors, in CT imaging of hip prostheses.

METHOD AND MATERIALS: A water phantom containing hip prostheses mounted in calf bones was scanned with four CT scanners; Philips Ingenuity; Toshiba Aquilion ONE Vision edition; GE Discovery 750 HD and Siemens SOMATOM Definition Flash. An uncorrected (reference) image was obtained for every CT and compared with images acquired with the scanner specific MAR technique; either monoenergetic reconstruction of Dual Energy CT (DECT) data (GE and Siemens) or the use of a MAR algorithm software (Philips and Toshiba), or a combination of the two (GE). The MAR techniques were applied for varying tube voltage, kernel and reconstruction technique. The reference images were quantitatively compared to the MAR images by analyzing the noise and the CT number accuracy in region of interests (ROIs). Visual grading was performed by five radiologists based on ten image quality (IQ) criteria.

RESULTS: The MAR algorithms implied a general noise reduction (by up to 77%) and improved IQ based on the majority of the visual grading criteria. The use of monoenergetic reconstructions of DECT data, without any MAR algorithm, did not decrease the noise in the ROIs to the same extent as the MAR algorithms (up to 41%) and did even increase the noise in one ROI. The visual grading evaluation showed that monoenergetic reconstructions in general degraded the IQ for one of the DECT scanners and improved the IQ for only a few of the criteria for the other DECT scanner.

CONCLUSION: The quantitative analysis and the visual grading evaluation showed that the IQ was generally improved when the MAR algorithms were used. However, additional artifacts and degradation of the IQ were noted in some MAR image regions. The use of monoenergetic reconstruction was concluded to not reduce metal artifacts to the same extent as the MAR algorithms and to even degrade the IQ in several image regions.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE/APPLICATION: This study points out advantages and potential risks of using MAR techniques in CT imaging of hip prostheses and will be useful for clinics when optimizing CT scan protocols and purchasing new CT systems.

Metal objects in the body such as hip prostheses cause artifacts in CT images. When CT images degraded by artifacts are used for treatment planning of radiotherapy, the artifacts can yield inaccurate dose calculations and, for particle beams, erroneous penetration depths. A metal artifact reduction software (O-MAR) installed on a Philips Brilliance Big Bore CT has been tested for applications in treatment planning of proton radiotherapy. Hip prostheses mounted in a water phantom were used as test objects. Images without metal objects were acquired and used as reference data for the analysis of artifact-affected regions outside of the metal objects in both the O-MAR corrected and the uncorrected images. Water equivalent thicknesses (WET) based on proton stopping power data were calculated to quantify differences in the calculated proton beam penetration for the different image sets. The WET to a selected point of interest between the hip prostheses was calculated for several beam directions of clinical relevance. The results show that the calculated differences in WET relative to the reference case were decreased when the O-MAR algorithm was applied. WET differences up to 2.0 cm were seen in the uncorrected case while, for the O-MAR corrected case, the maximum difference was decreased to 0.4 cm. The O-MAR algorithm can significantly improve the accuracy in proton range calculations. However, there are some residual effects, and the use of proton beam directions along artifact streaks should only be used with caution and appropriate margins.