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: Comparison of perfused volume segmentation between cone-beam CT and 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT for treatment dosimetry before selective internal radiation therapy using 90Y-glass microspheres.
    Author: Martin M, Hocquelet A, Debordeaux F, Bordenave L, Blanc JF, Papadopoulos P, Lapuyade B, Trillaud H, Pinaquy JB.
    Journal: Diagn Interv Imaging; 2021 Jan; 102(1):45-52. PubMed ID: 33032960.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: To compare the reliability and accuracy of the pre-treatment dosimetry predictions using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) versus 99mTc-labeled macroaggregated albumin (MAA) SPECT/CT for perfused volume segmentation in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated by selective internal radiation therapy (SIRT) using 90Y-glass microspheres. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifteen patients (8 men, 7 women) with a mean age of 68.3±10.5 (SD) years (range: 47-82 years) who underwent a total of 17 SIRT procedures using 90Y-glass microspheres for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma were retrospectively included. Pre-treatment dosimetry data were calculated from 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT using either CBCT or 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT to segment the perfused volumes. Post-treatment dosimetry data were calculated using 90Y imaging (SPECT/CT or PET/CT). The whole liver, non-tumoral liver, and tumor volumes were segmented on CT or MRI data. The mean absorbed doses of the tumor (DT), non-tumoral liver, perfused liver (DPL) and perfused non-tumoral liver were calculated. Intra- and interobserver reliabilities were investigated by calculating Lin's concordant correlation coefficients (ρc values). The differences (biases) between pre- and post-treatment dosimetry data were assessed using the modified Bland-Altman method (for non-normally distributed variables), and systematic bias was evaluated using Passing-Bablok regression. RESULTS: The intra- and interobserver reliabilities were good-to-excellent (ρc: 0.80-0.99) for all measures using both methods. Compared with 90Y imaging, the median differences were 5.8Gy (IQR: -12.7; 16.1) and 5.6Gy (IQR: -13.6; 10.2) for DPL-CBCT and DPL-99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT, respectively. The median differences were 1.6Gy (IQR: -29; 7.53) and 9.8Gy (IQR: -28.4; 19.9) for DT-CBCT and DT-99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT respectively. Passing-Bablok regression analysis showed that both CBCT and 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT had proportional biases and thus tendencies to overestimate DT and DPL at higher post-treatment doses. CONCLUSION: CBCT may be a reliable segmentation method, but it does not significantly increase the accuracy of dose prediction compared with that of 99mTc-MAA SPECT/CT. At higher doses both methods tend to overestimate the doses to tumors and perfused livers.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]