Design of quality assurance for sonographic prostate brachytherapy needle guides

COMP report: CPQR technical quality control guidelines for low-dose-rate permanent seed brachytherapy

The Canadian Organization of Medical Physicists (COMP), in close partnership with the Canadian Partnership for Quality Radiotherapy (CPQR) has developed a series of Technical Quality Control (TQC) guidelines for radiation treatment equipment. These guidelines outline the performance objectives that equipment should meet in order to ensure an acceptable level of radiation treatment quality. The TQC guidelines have been rigorously reviewed and field tested in a variety of Canadian radiation treatment facilities. The development process enables rapid review and update to keep the guidelines current with changes in technology. This article contains detailed performance objectives and safety criteria for low‐dose‐rate (LDR) permanent seed brachytherapy.

A review of the recommendations governing quality assurance of ultrasound systems used for guidance in prostate brachytherapy

Ultrasound guided brachytherapy for the treatment of prostate cancer has become a routine treatment option, due to many benefits including patient recovery and dose localisation [1]; however it is not clear whether the standards which govern the image quality for these systems are adequate. Upon review of the recommended standards for ultrasound systems used in prostate brachytherapy procedures, the recommended tests do not appear to be specific to the clinical application of ultrasound guided prostate brachytherapy. Rather they are generic and similar to those recommended for other clinical applications such as general abdominal scanning [2]. Furthermore, there is growing evidence that these tests should be specific to the clinical application [3,4] in order to gain meaningful data about the performance of the system for the application, and also to detect clinically relevant changes in quality control results. An additional problem is that there are no clinically relevant test phantom recommended for the quality assurance of ultrasound systems used in prostate brachytherapy. The image quality for this application of ultrasound needs to be monitored to ensure consistent levels of confidence in the procedure. This paper reviews the currently recommended test guidelines and test phantoms for ultrasound systems used in prostate brachytherapy from the different standard bodies and professional organisations. A critical analysis of those tests which are most reflective of the imaging and guidance tasks undertaken in an ultrasound guided prostate brachytherapy procedure will also be presented to inform the design of a TRUS quality assurance protocol.

Automated intraoperative calibration for prostate cancer brachytherapy

PURPOSE

Prostate cancer brachytherapy relies on an accurate spatial registration between the implant needles and the TRUS image, called "calibration". The authors propose a new device and a fast, automatic method to calibrate the brachytherapy system in the operating room, with instant error feedback.

METHODS

A device was CAD-designed and precision-engineered, which mechanically couples a calibration phantom with an exact replica of the standard brachytherapy template. From real-time TRUS images acquired from the calibration device and processed by the calibration system, the coordinate transformation between the brachytherapy template and the TRUS images was computed automatically. The system instantly generated a report of the target reconstruction accuracy based on the current calibration outcome.

RESULTS

Four types of validation tests were conducted. First, 50 independent, real-time calibration trials yielded an average of 0.57 ± 0.13 mm line reconstruction error (LRE) relative to ground truth. Second, the averaged LRE was 0.37 ± 0.25 mm relative to ground truth in tests with six different commercial TRUS scanners operating at similar imaging settings. Furthermore, testing with five different commercial stepper systems yielded an average of 0.29 ± 0.16 mm LRE relative to ground truth. Finally, the system achieved an average of 0.56 ± 0.27 mm target registration error (TRE) relative to ground truth in needle insertion tests through the template in a water tank.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed automatic, intraoperative calibration system for prostate cancer brachytherapy has achieved high accuracy, precision, and robustness.

Effect of using different U/S probe Standoff materials in image geometry for interventional procedures: the example of prostate

Purpose

This study investigates the distortion of geometry of catheters and anatomy in acquired U/S images, caused by utilizing various stand-off materials for covering a transrectal bi-planar ultrasound probe in HDR and LDR prostate brachytherapy, biopsy and other interventional procedures. Furthermore, an evaluation of currently established water-bath based quality assurance (QA) procedures is presented.

Material and methods

Image acquisitions of an ultrasound QA setup were carried out at 5 MHz and 7 MHz. The U/S probe was covered by EA 4015 Silicone Standoff kit, or UA0059 Endocavity balloon filled either with water or one of the following: 40 ml of Endosgel^®, Instillagel^®, Ultraschall gel or Space OAR™ gel. The differences between images were recorded. Consequently, the dosimetric impact of the observed image distortion was investigated, using a tissue equivalent ultrasound prostate phantom – Model number 053 (CIRS Inc., Norfolk, VA, USA).

Results

By using the EA 4015 Silicone Standoff kit in normal water with sound speed of 1525 m/s, a 3 mm needle shift was observed. The expansion of objects appeared in radial direction. The shift deforms also the PTV (prostate in our case) and other organs at risk (OARs) in the same way leading to overestimation of volume and underestimation of the dose. On the other hand, Instillagel^® and Space OAR™ “shrinks” objects in an ultrasound image for 0.65 mm and 0.40 mm, respectively.

Conclusions

The use of EA 4015 Silicone Standoff kit for image acquisition, leads to erroneous contouring of PTV and OARs and reconstruction and placement of catheters, which results to incorrect dose calculation during prostate brachytherapy. Moreover, the reliability of QA procedures lies mostly in the right temperature of the water used for accurate simulation of real conditions of transrectal ultrasound imaging.