Quality assurance assessment of diagnostic and radiation therapy-simulation CT image registration for head and neck radiation therapy: anatomic region of interest-based comparison of rigid and deformable algorithms.

PURPOSE: To develop a quality assurance (QA) workflow by using a robust, curated, manually segmented anatomic region-of-interest (ROI) library as a benchmark for quantitative assessment of different image registration techniques used for head and neck radiation therapy-simulation computed tomography (CT) with diagnostic CT coregistration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Radiation therapy-simulation CT images and diagnostic CT images in 20 patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma treated with curative-intent intensity-modulated radiation therapy between August 2011 and May 2012 were retrospectively retrieved with institutional review board approval. Sixty-eight reference anatomic ROIs with gross tumor and nodal targets were then manually contoured on images from each examination. Diagnostic CT images were registered with simulation CT images rigidly and by using four deformable image registration (DIR) algorithms: atlas based, B-spline, demons, and optical flow. The resultant deformed ROIs were compared with manually contoured reference ROIs by using similarity coefficient metrics (ie, Dice similarity coefficient) and surface distance metrics (ie, 95% maximum Hausdorff distance). The nonparametric Steel test with control was used to compare different DIR algorithms with rigid image registration (RIR) by using the post hoc Wilcoxon signed-rank test for stratified metric comparison. RESULTS: A total of 2720 anatomic and 50 tumor and nodal ROIs were delineated. All DIR algorithms showed improved performance over RIR for anatomic and target ROI conformance, as shown for most comparison metrics (Steel test, P < .008 after Bonferroni correction). The performance of different algorithms varied substantially with stratification by specific anatomic structures or category and simulation CT section thickness. CONCLUSION: Development of a formal ROI-based QA workflow for registration assessment demonstrated improved performance with DIR techniques over RIR. After QA, DIR implementation should be the standard for head and neck diagnostic CT and simulation CT allineation, especially for target delineation.

Prospective observer and software-based assessment of magnetic resonance imaging quality in head and neck cancer: Should standard positioning and immobilization be required for radiation therapy applications?

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the potential of a head and neck magnetic resonance simulation and immobilization protocol on reducing motion-induced artifacts and improving positional variance for radiation therapy applications. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Two groups (group 1, 17 patients; group 2, 14 patients) of patients with head and neck cancer were included under a prospective, institutional review board-approved protocol and signed informed consent. A 3.0-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanner was used for anatomic and dynamic contrast-enhanced acquisitions with standard diagnostic MRI setup for group 1 and radiation therapy immobilization devices for group 2 patients. The impact of magnetic resonance simulation/immobilization was evaluated qualitatively by 2 observers in terms of motion artifacts and positional reproducibility and quantitatively using 3-dimensional deformable registration to track intrascan maximum motion displacement of voxels inside 7 manually segmented regions of interest. RESULTS: The image quality of group 2 (29 examinations) was significantly better than that of group 1 (50 examinations) as rated by both observers in terms of motion minimization and imaging reproducibility (P < .0001). The greatest average maximum displacement was at the region of the larynx in the posterior direction for patients in group 1 (17 mm; standard deviation, 8.6 mm), whereas the smallest average maximum displacement was at the region of the posterior fossa in the superior direction for patients in group 2 (0.4 mm; standard deviation, 0.18 mm). Compared with group 1, maximum regional motion was reduced in group 2 patients in the oral cavity, floor of mouth, oropharynx, and larynx regions; however, the motion reduction reached statistical significance only in the regions of the oral cavity and floor of mouth (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: The image quality of head and neck MRI in terms of motion-related artifacts and positional reproducibility was greatly improved by use of radiation therapy immobilization devices. Consequently, immobilization with external and intraoral fixation in MRI examinations is required for radiation therapy application.