These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Clinical evaluation of an MRI-to-ultrasound deformable image registration algorithm for prostate brachytherapy.
    Author: Shaaer A, Davidson M, Semple M, Nicolae A, Mendez LC, Chung H, Loblaw A, Tseng CL, Morton G, Ravi A.
    Journal: Brachytherapy; 2019; 18(1):95-102. PubMed ID: 30287271.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: Identifying dominant intraprostatic lesions (DILs) on transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) images during prostate high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) treatment planning is challenging. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI) is the tool of choice for DIL identification; however, the geometry of the prostate on mpMRI and on the TRUS may differ significantly, requiring image registration. This study evaluates the efficacy of an in-house software for MRI-to-TRUS DIL registration (MR2US) and compares its results to rigid and B-Spline deformable registration. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Ten patients with intermediate-risk prostate cancer, each with mpMRI and TRUS data sets, were included in this study. Five radiation oncologists (ROs) with expertise in TRUS-based HDR-BT were asked to cognitively contour the DIL onto the TRUS image using mpMRI as reference. The contours were analyzed for concordance using simultaneous truth and performance level estimation algorithm. Similarity indices, DIL volumes, and distance between centroid positions were measured to compare the consensus contours against the contours from ROs and the automated algorithms; registration time between all contouring methods was recorded. RESULTS: MR2US registration had the highest dice coefficients among all patients with a mean of 0.80 ± 0.13 in comparison to rigid (0.65 ± 0.20) and B-Spline (0.51 ± 0.30). The distance between centroid positions between simultaneous truth and performance level estimation contour and MR2US, rigid, and B-Spline contours were 5 ± 2, 7 ± 5, and 18 ± 11 mm, respectively. The average registration time was significantly shorter for MR2US (11 ± 2 s) and rigid algorithm (7 ± 1 s) compared to ROs (227 ± 27 s) and B-Spline (199 ± 38 s). CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of integrating an MRI-delineated DIL into a TRUS-based BT workflow has been validated in this study. The MR2US software is fast and accurate enough to be used for DIL identification in prostate HDR-BT.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]