期刊文献+

用PrecisePLAN系统分析锥形束CT图像体积精度 被引量:1

Precise Plan in the analysis of volume precision in Synergy^(TM) conebeam CT image
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的建立检测SynergyTM锥形束CT图像体积精度的方法。方法分别将QUASARTM模体中心置于SynergyTM系统CBCT的中心及沿加速器头脚方向偏离等中心5、8、10 cm处进行扫描,在三维重建图像中测量不同模体的体积,并与FBCT结果和原标称值进行对比,从而检验CBCT的体积精度,并用Precise PLAN系统进行分析。结果中球在中心处与偏中心5、8 cm处测量的平均值与标称值相差1.5%。小球在中心处与偏中心5、8、10 cm处测量的平均值与标称值相差8.1%。大立方体在中心处与偏中心5、8、10 cm处测量的平均值与标称值相差0.8%。小立方体在中心处与偏中心5、8、10 cm处测量的平均值与标称值相差2.9%。结论在SynergyTM锥形束CT有效扫描重建范围内,重建体积精度满足临床要求,并且与偏离锥形束CT中心的距离无关。 Objective A method of checking the volume precision in SynergyTM conebeam CT image. Methods To scan known phantoms(big, middle, small spheres, cubes and cuniform cavum) at different positions(CBCT centre and departure centre from 5, 8, 10 cm along the accelerator G-T way)with conebeam CT, the phantom volume of reconstructed images were measure. Then to compared measured volume of Synergy^TM conebeam CT with fanbeam CT results and nominal values. Results The middle spheres had 1.5% discrepancy in nominal values and metrical average values at CBCT centre and departure from centre 5, 8 cm along accelerator G-T way. The small spheres showed 8.1%, with 0.8% of the big cube and 2.9% of small cube, in nominal values and metrical average values at CBCT centre and departure from centre 5, 8, 10 cm along the accelerator G-T way. Conclusion In valid scan range of Synergy^TM conebeam CT, reconstructed precision is independent of the distance deviation from the center.
出处 《中华放射肿瘤学杂志》 CSCD 北大核心 2007年第6期466-468,共3页 Chinese Journal of Radiation Oncology
关键词 断层摄影术 X线计算机 锥形束 体积精度 模体 Tomograph,X-ray computed Conebeam volume precision Phantom
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

  • 1Ling CC, Yorke E, Fuks Z. From IMRT to IGRT: frontierland or neverland. Radiother Oncol,2006,78 : 119-122.
  • 2Lei X, Brian T, Eduard S, et al.Overview of image-guided radiation therapy. Med Dosimetry, 2006,31:91-112.
  • 3Young, bin Choa, Douglas J. Moseley, et al. Accurate technique for complete geometric calibration of cone-beam computed tomography systems. Med. Phys. 2005,32:968-983.
  • 4Daniel Letoumeau, Rebecca Wang, et al. Online planning and delivery technique for radiotherapy of spinal metastases using Cone-Beam CT: image quality and system performance. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2007,67 : 1229-1237.
  • 5McBain CA, Henry AM, Sykes J,et al. X-ray volumetric imaging in image-guided radiotherapy: the new standard in on-treatment imaging. Int J Radiat Oneol Biol Phys, 2006,64:625 -634.

同被引文献3

  • 1邓小武,黄劭敏,祁振宇.CT模拟机的质量控制和质量保证检验[J].中国肿瘤,2004,13(9):546-550. 被引量:34
  • 2Mutic S, Paha JR, Butker EK, et al. Quality assurance for computedtomography simulators and the compute-tomography-simulation process: Report of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group No.66 [J]. Med Phys, 2003,30(10):2762-2792.
  • 3Fraass B, Doppke K, Hunt M, et al. AAPM report No.53.Quality assurmace for clinical radiotherapy treatment planning [J]. Med Phys, 1998, 25:656-661.

引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部