Computed Tomography As a Source of Electron Density Information for Radiation Treatment Planning

Overview

Journal Strahlenther Onkol

Specialties Oncology
Radiology

Date 2010 May 12

PMID 20458451

Citations 18

Authors

Witold Skrzynski

Sylwia Zielinska-Dabrowska

Marta Wachowicz

Wioletta Slusarczyk-Kacprzyk

Pawel F Kukolowicz

Wojciech Bulski

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the performance of computed tomography (CT) systems of various designs as a source of electron density (rho(el)) data for treatment planning of radiation therapy.

Material And Methods: Dependence of CT numbers on relative electron density of tissue-equivalent materials (HU-rho(el) relationship) was measured for several general-purpose CT systems (single-slice, multislice, wide-bore multislice), for radiotherapy simulators with a single-slice CT and kV CBCT (cone-beam CT) options, as well as for linear accelerators with kV and MV CBCT systems. Electron density phantoms of four sizes were used. Measurement data were compared with the standard HU-rhoel relationships predefined in two commercial treatment-planning systems (TPS).

Results: The HU-rho(el) relationships obtained with all of the general-purpose CT scanners operating at voltages close to 120 kV were very similar to each other and close to those predefined in TPS. Some dependency of HU values on tube voltage was observed for bone- equivalent materials. For a given tube voltage, differences in results obtained for different phantoms were larger than those obtained for different CT scanners. For radiotherapy simulators and for kV CBCT systems, the information on rhoel was much less precise because of poor uniformity of images. For MV CBCT, the results were significantly different than for kV systems due to the differing energy spectrum of the beam.

Conclusion: The HU-rho(el) relationships predefined in TPS can be used for general-purpose CT systems operating at voltages close to 120 kV. For nontypical imaging systems (e.g., CBCT), the relationship can be significantly different and, therefore, it should always be measured and carefully analyzed before using CT data for treatment planning.

Citing Articles

Investigation of the Effect of Calibration Curves Obtained from Different Computed Tomography Devices on the Dose Distribution of Tomotherapy Plans.

Demir H, Gul O, Kanyilmaz G J Med Phys. 2025; 49(4):545-550.

PMID: 39926133 PMC: 11801095. DOI: 10.4103/jmp.jmp_129_24.

Automated contouring of CTV and OARs in planning CT scans using novel hybrid convolution-transformer networks for prostate cancer radiotherapy.

Arjmandi N, Nasseri S, Momennezhad M, Mehdizadeh A, Hosseini S, Mohebbi S Discov Oncol. 2024; 15(1):323.

PMID: 39085488 PMC: 11555176. DOI: 10.1007/s12672-024-01177-9.

Synthetic computed tomography based dose calculation in prostate cancer patients with hip prostheses for magnetic resonance imaging-only radiotherapy.

Koivula L, Seppala T, Collan J, Visapaa H, Tenhunen M, Korhonen A Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2023; 27:100469.

PMID: 37520639 PMC: 10371839. DOI: 10.1016/j.phro.2023.100469.

Effect of computed tomography value error on dose calculation in adaptive radiotherapy with Elekta X-ray volume imaging cone beam computed tomography.

Taniguchi T, Hara T, Shimozato T, Hyodo F, Ono K, Nakaya S J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2021; 22(9):271-279.

PMID: 34375008 PMC: 8425939. DOI: 10.1002/acm2.13384.

ACCURACY OF CT NUMBERS OBTAINED BY DIRA AND MONOENERGETIC PLUS ALGORITHMS IN DUAL-ENERGY COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY.

Magnusson M, Sandborg M, Alm Carlsson G, Henriksson L, Carlsson Tedgren A, Malusek A Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2021; 195(3-4):212-217.

PMID: 34265847 PMC: 8507448. DOI: 10.1093/rpd/ncab108.

References

Guan H, Yin F, Kim J . Accuracy of inhomogeneity correction in photon radiotherapy from CT scans with different settings. Phys Med Biol. 2002; 47(17):N223-31. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/47/17/402. View

Sterzing F, Schubert K, Sroka-Perez G, Kalz J, Debus J, Herfarth K . Helical tomotherapy. Experiences of the first 150 patients in Heidelberg. Strahlenther Onkol. 2008; 184(1):8-14. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-008-1778-6. View

Kilby W, Sage J, Rabett V . Tolerance levels for quality assurance of electron density values generated from CT in radiotherapy treatment planning. Phys Med Biol. 2002; 47(9):1485-92. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/47/9/304. View

PARKER R, Hobday P, Cassell K . The direct use of CT numbers in radiotherapy dosage calculations for inhomogeneous media. Phys Med Biol. 1979; 24(4):802-9. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/24/4/011. View

Morin O, Chen J, Aubin M, Gillis A, Aubry J, Bose S . Dose calculation using megavoltage cone-beam CT. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2007; 67(4):1201-10. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.10.048. View

Yoo S, Yin F . Dosimetric feasibility of cone-beam CT-based treatment planning compared to CT-based treatment planning. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006; 66(5):1553-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.08.031. View

Siewerdsen J, Jaffray D . Cone-beam computed tomography with a flat-panel imager: magnitude and effects of x-ray scatter. Med Phys. 2001; 28(2):220-31. DOI: 10.1118/1.1339879. View

Morin O, Aubry J, Aubin M, Chen J, Descovich M, Hashemi A . Physical performance and image optimization of megavoltage cone-beam CT. Med Phys. 2009; 36(4):1421-32. DOI: 10.1118/1.3096706. View

Zabel-du Bois A, Ackermann B, Hauswald H, Schramm O, Sroka-Perez G, Huber P . Influence of intravenous contrast agent on dose calculation in 3-D treatment planning for radiosurgery of cerebral arteriovenous malformations. Strahlenther Onkol. 2009; 185(5):318-24. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-009-1927-6. View

10.

Vandecasteele K, De Neve W, De Gersem W, Delrue L, Paelinck L, Makar A . Intensity-modulated arc therapy with simultaneous integrated boost in the treatment of primary irresectable cervical cancer. Treatment planning, quality control, and clinical implementation. Strahlenther Onkol. 2009; 185(12):799-807. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-009-1986-8. View

11.

Bral S, Vinh-Hung V, Everaert H, De Coninck P, Storme G . The use of molecular imaging to evaluate radiation fields in the adjuvant setting of breast cancer: a feasibility study. Strahlenther Onkol. 2008; 184(2):100-4. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-008-1769-7. View

12.

Cozzi L, Fogliata A, Buffa F, Bieri S . Dosimetric impact of computed tomography calibration on a commercial treatment planning system for external radiation therapy. Radiother Oncol. 1999; 48(3):335-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8140(98)00072-3. View

13.

Thomas S . Relative electron density calibration of CT scanners for radiotherapy treatment planning. Br J Radiol. 2000; 72(860):781-6. DOI: 10.1259/bjr.72.860.10624344. View

14.

Constantinou C, Harrington J, DeWerd L . An electron density calibration phantom for CT-based treatment planning computers. Med Phys. 1992; 19(2):325-7. DOI: 10.1118/1.596862. View

15.

Seco J, Evans P . Assessing the effect of electron density in photon dose calculations. Med Phys. 2006; 33(2):540-52. DOI: 10.1118/1.2161407. View

16.

Knoos T, Nilsson M, Ahlgren L . A method for conversion of Hounsfield number to electron density and prediction of macroscopic pair production cross-sections. Radiother Oncol. 1986; 5(4):337-45. DOI: 10.1016/s0167-8140(86)80183-9. View

17.

Thomas T, Devakumar D, Purnima S, Ravindran B . The adaptation of megavoltage cone beam CT for use in standard radiotherapy treatment planning. Phys Med Biol. 2009; 54(7):2067-77. DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/54/7/014. View

18.

Pech M, Mohnike K, Wieners G, Bialek E, Dudeck O, Seidensticker M . Radiotherapy of liver metastases. Comparison of target volumes and dose-volume histograms employing CT- or MRI-based treatment planning. Strahlenther Onkol. 2008; 184(5):256-61. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-008-1849-8. View

19.

Burridge N, Rowbottom C, Burt P . Effect of contrast enhanced CT scans on heterogeneity corrected dose computations in the lung. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2007; 7(4):1-12. PMC: 5722395. DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v7i4.2240. View

20.

Georg D, Georg P, Hillbrand M, Potter R, Mock U . Assessment of improved organ at risk sparing for advanced cervix carcinoma utilizing precision radiotherapy techniques. Strahlenther Onkol. 2008; 184(11):586-91. DOI: 10.1007/s00066-008-1872-9. View