Dataset Information

Comparison of the IPSA and HIPO algorithms for interstitial tongue high-dose-rate brachytherapy.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

This study aimed to compare the inverse planning simulated annealing (IPSA) stochastic algorithm with the hybrid inverse planning and optimization (HIPO) algorithm for interstitial tongue high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy.

Methods

Twenty patients who received radiotherapy for tongue cancer using interstitial HDR brachytherapy were retrospectively selected for this study. Oncentra Brachy v. 4.3 was used for IPSA and HIPO planning. Four to eight fixed catheter configurations were determined according to the target shape. During the optimization process, predetermined constrain values were used for each IPSA and HIPO plan. The dosimetric parameters and dwell time were analyzed to evaluate the performances of the plans.

Results

The total dwell time using IPSA was 4 seconds longer than that of HIPO. The number of active positions per catheter for the IPSA plans were approximately 2.5 fewer than those of the HIPO plans. The dose-volumetric parameters related to the clinical target volume with IPSA were lower than those with HIPO. In terms of the dose-volumetric parameters related to normal tissue, HIPO tended to associate with slightly higher values than IPSA, without statistical significance. After GrO, the target coverages were satisfied to clinical goal for all patients. The total dwell times was approximately increased by 10%.

Conclusions

The IPSA and HIPO dose optimization algorithms generate similar dosimetric results. In terms of the dwell time, HIPO appears to be more beneficial.

SUBMITTER: Choi CH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6171910 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Registering CTs for patients receiving external beam radiotherapy (EBRT) with a boost dose from high-dose-rate brachytherapy (HDR) can be challenging due to considerable image discrepancies (e.g. rectal fillings, HDR needles, HDR artefacts and HDR rectal packing materials). This study is the first to comparatively evaluate image processing and registration methods used to register the rectums in EBRT and HDR CTs of prostate cancer patients. The focus is on the rectum due to planned future analysis of rectal dose-volume response.For 64 patients, the EBRT CT was retrospectively registered to the HDR CT with rigid registration and non-rigid registration methods in VelocityAI. Image processing was undertaken on the HDR CT and the rigidly-registered EBRT CT to reduce the impact of discriminating features on alternative non-rigid registration methods applied in the software suite for Deformable Image Registration and Adaptive Radiotherapy Research (DIRART) using the Horn-Schunck optical flow and Demons algorithms. The propagated EBRT-rectum structures were compared with the HDR structure using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC), Hausdorff distance (HD) and average surface distance (ASD). The image similarity was compared using mutual information (MI) and root mean squared error (MSE). The displacement vector field was assessed via the Jacobian determinant (JAC). The post-registration alignments of rectums for 21 patients were visually assessed.The greatest improvement in the median DSC relative to the rigid registration result was 35 % for the Horn-Schunck algorithm with image processing. This algorithm also provided the best ASD results. The VelocityAI algorithms provided superior HD, MI, MSE and JAC results. The visual assessment indicated that the rigid plus deformable multi-pass method within VelocityAI resulted in the best rectum alignment.The DSC, ASD and HD improved significantly relative to the rigid registration result if image processing was applied prior to DIRART non-rigid registrations, whereas VelocityAI without image processing provided significant improvements. Reliance on a single rectum structure-correspondence metric would have been misleading as the metrics were inconsistent with one another and visual assessments. It was important to calculate metrics for a restricted region covering the organ of interest. Overall, VelocityAI generated the best registrations for the rectum according to the visual assessment, HD, MI, MSE and JAC results.