Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
An Automated Workflow to Improve Efficiency in Radiation Therapy Treatment Planning by Prioritizing Organs at Risk.
Aliotta, Eric; Nourzadeh, Hamidreza; Choi, Wookjin; Leandro Alves, Victor Gabriel; Siebers, Jeffrey V.
Afiliação
  • Aliotta E; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.
  • Nourzadeh H; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.
  • Choi W; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.
  • Leandro Alves VG; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.
  • Siebers JV; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Adv Radiat Oncol ; 5(6): 1324-1333, 2020.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33305095
PURPOSE: Manual delineation (MD) of organs at risk (OAR) is time and labor intensive. Auto-delineation (AD) can reduce the need for MD, but because current algorithms are imperfect, manual review and modification is still typically used. Recognizing that many OARs are sufficiently far from important dose levels that they do not pose a realistic risk, we hypothesize that some OARs can be excluded from MD and manual review with no clinical effect. The purpose of this study was to develop a method that automatically identifies these OARs and enables more efficient workflows that incorporate AD without degrading clinical quality. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Preliminary dose map estimates were generated for n = 10 patients with head and neck cancers using only prescription and target-volume information. Conservative estimates of clinical OAR objectives were computed using AD structures with spatial expansion buffers to account for potential delineation uncertainties. OARs with estimated dose metrics below clinical tolerances were deemed low priority and excluded from MD and/or manual review. Final plans were then optimized using high-priority MD OARs and low-priority AD OARs and compared with reference plans generated using all MD OARs. Multiple different spatial buffers were used to accommodate different potential delineation uncertainties. RESULTS: Sixty-seven out of 201 total OARs were identified as low-priority using the proposed methodology, which permitted a 33% reduction in structures requiring manual delineation/review. Plans optimized using low-priority AD OARs without review or modification met all planning objectives that were met when all MD OARs were used, indicating clinical equivalence. CONCLUSIONS: Prioritizing OARs using estimated dose distributions allowed a substantial reduction in required MD and review without affecting clinically relevant dosimetry.

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Guideline / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Etiology_studies / Guideline / Risk_factors_studies Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article