Performance Evaluation of Deformable Image Registration Algorithms Using Computed Tomography of Multiple Lung Metastases

A novel evaluation model of image registration for cone-beam computed tomography guided lung cancer radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to establish a weighted comprehensive evaluation model (WCEM) of image registration for cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) guided lung cancer radiotherapy that considers the geometric accuracy of gross target volume (GTV) and organs at risk (OARs), and assess the registration accuracy of different image registration methods to provide clinical references.

METHODS

The planning CT and CBCT images of 20 lung cancer patients were registered using diverse algorithms (bony and grayscale) and regions of interest (target, ipsilateral, and body). We compared the coverage ratio (CR) of the planning target volume (PTVCT) to GTVCBCT, as well as the dice similarity coefficient (DSC) of the GTV and OARs, considering the treatment position across various registration methods. Furthermore, we developed a mathematical model to assess registration results comprehensively. This model was evaluated and validated using CRFs across four automatic registration methods.

RESULTS

The grayscale registration method, coupled with the registration of the ipsilateral structure, exhibited the highest level of automatic registration accuracy, the DSC were 0.87 ± 0.09 (GTV), 0.71 ± 0.09 (esophagus), 0.74 ± 0.09 (spinal cord), and 0.91 ± 0.05 (heart), respectively. Our proposed WCEM proved to be both practical and effective. The results clearly indicated that the grayscale registration method, when applied to the ipsilateral structure, achieved the highest CRF score. The average CRF scores, excellent rates, good rate and qualification rates were 58 ± 26, 40%, 75%, and 85%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study successfully developed a clinically relevant weighted evaluation model for CBCT-guided lung cancer radiotherapy. Validation confirmed the grayscale method's optimal performance in ipsilateral structure registration.

Review and recommendations on deformable image registration uncertainties for radiotherapy applications

Deformable image registration (DIR) is a versatile tool used in many applications in radiotherapy (RT). DIR algorithms have been implemented in many commercial treatment planning systems providing accessible and easy-to-use solutions. However, the geometric uncertainty of DIR can be large and difficult to quantify, resulting in barriers to clinical practice. Currently, there is no agreement in the RT community on how to quantify these uncertainties and determine thresholds that distinguish a good DIR result from a poor one. This review summarises the current literature on sources of DIR uncertainties and their impact on RT applications. Recommendations are provided on how to handle these uncertainties for patient-specific use, commissioning, and research. Recommendations are also provided for developers and vendors to help users to understand DIR uncertainties and make the application of DIR in RT safer and more reliable.

Evaluation of DIR algorithm performance in real patients for radiotherapy treatments: A systematic review of operator-dependent strategies

PURPOSE

The performance of deformable medical image registration (DIR) algorithms has become a major concern.

METHODS

We aimed to obtain updated information on DIR algorithm performance quantification through a literature review of articles published between 2010 and 2022. We focused only on studies using operator-based methods to treat real patients. The PubMed, Google Scholar and Embase databases were searched following PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

One hundred and seven articles were identified. The mean number of patients and registrations per publication was 20 and 63, respectively. We found 23 different geometric metrics appearing at least twice, and the dosimetric impact of DIR was quantified in 32 articles. Forty-eight different at-risk organs were described, and target volumes were studied in 43 publications. Prostate, head-and-neck and thoracic locations represented more than ¾ of the studied locations. We summarized the type of DIR and the images used, and other key elements. Intra/interobserver variability, threshold values and the correlation between metrics were also discussed.

CONCLUSIONS

This literature review covers the past decade and should facilitate the implementation of DIR algorithms in clinical practice by providing practical and pertinent information to quantify their performance on real patients.