USABILITY EVALUATION OF PLANNING MRI ACQUISITION WHEN CT/MRI FUSION OF COMPUTERIZED TREATMENT PLAN

전산화 치료계획의 CT/MRI 영상 융합 시 PLANNING MRI영상 획득의 유용성 평가

  • Park, Do-Geun (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center) ;
  • Choe, Byeong-Gi (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center) ;
  • Kim, Jin-Man (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center) ;
  • Lee, Dong-Hun (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center) ;
  • Song, Gi-Won (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center) ;
  • Park, Yeong-Hwan (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center)
  • 박도근 (삼성서울병원 방사선 종양학과) ;
  • 최병기 (삼성서울병원 방사선 종양학과) ;
  • 김진만 (삼성서울병원 방사선 종양학과) ;
  • 이동훈 (삼성서울병원 방사선 종양학과) ;
  • 송기원 (삼성서울병원 방사선 종양학과) ;
  • 박영환 (삼성서울병원 방사선 종양학과)
  • Received : 2014.04.07
  • Accepted : 2014.04.30
  • Published : 2014.06.30

Abstract

Purpose : By taking advantage of each imaging modality, the use of fused CT/MRI image has increased in prostate cancer radiation therapy. However, fusion uncertainty may cause partial target miss or normal organ overdose. In order to complement such limitation, our hospital acquired MRI image (Planning MRI) by setting up patients with the same fixing tool and posture as CT simulation. This study aims to evaluate the usefulness of the Planning MRI through comparing and analyzing the diagnostic MRI image and Planning MRI image. Materials and Methods : This study targeted 10 patients who had been diagnosed with prostate cancer and prescribed nonhormone and definitive RT 70 Gy/28 fx from August 2011 to July 2013. Each patient had both CT and MRI simulations. The MRI images were acquired within one half hour after the CT simulation. The acquired CT/MRI images were fused primarily based on bony structure matching. This study measured the volume of prostate in the images of Planning MRI and diagnostic MRI. The diameters at the craniocaudal, anteroposterior and left-to-right directions from the center of prostate were measured in order to compare changes in the shape of prostate. Results : As a result of comparing the volume of prostate in the images of Planning MRI and diagnostic MRI, they were found to be $25.01cm^3$(range $15.84-34.75cm^3$) and $25.05cm^3$(range $15.28-35.88cm^3$) on average respectively. The diagnostic MRI had an increase of 0.12 % as compared with the Planning MRI. On the planning MRI, there was an increase in the volume by $7.46cm^3$(29 %) at the transition zone directions, and there was a decrease in the volume by $8.52cm^3$(34 %) in the peripheral zone direction. As a result of measuring the diameters at the craniocaudal, anteroposterior and left-to-right directions in the prostate, the Planning MRI was found to have on average 3.82cm, 2.38cm and 4.59cm respectively and the diagnostic MRI was found to have on average 3.37cm, 2.76cm and 4.51cm respectively. All three prostate diameters changed and the change was significant in the Planning MRI. On average, the anteroposterior prostate diameter decrease by 0.38cm(13 %). The mean right-to-left and craniocaudal diameter increased by 0.08cm(1.6 %) and 0.45cm(13 %), respectively. Conclusion : Based on the results of this study, it was found that the total volumes of prostate in the Planning MRI and the diagnostic MRI were not significantly different. However, there was a change in the shape and partial volume of prostate due to the insertion of prostate balloon tube to the rectum. Thus, if the Planning MRI images were used when conducting the fusion of CT/MRI images, it would be possible to include the target in the CTV without a loss as much as the increased volume in the transition zone. Also, it would be possible to reduce the radiation dose delivered to the rectum through separating more clearly the reduction of peripheral zone volume. Therefore, the author of this study believes that acquisition of Planning MRI image should be made to ensure target delineation and localization accuracy.

목 적 : 전립선 암의 방사선 치료 시 컴퓨터 단층촬영 영상만을 이용하여 타겟 및 정상장기의 체적을 정의하기에는 제약성이 따른다. 이러한 제약성을 보완해주기 위하여 연부조직 대조도가 우수한 자기공명영상 장치가 사용되고 있다. 그러나 부정확한 CT/MRI 영상의 융합은 정확한 타겟 설정에 불확실성이 따르게 되며 정상장기의 불필요한 선량이 입사되어 부작용을 초래 할 수 있다. 이러한 불확실성을 줄이기 위해 본원에서는 CT/MRI영상 융합 시 모의 치료 과정과 동일한 고정용구와 자세로 환자를 셋업하여 MRI(Planning MRI)영상을 획득하고 있으며, 본 연구에서는 진단용 MRI영상과 Planning MRI영상을 비교 분석하여 Planning MRI의 유용성을 평가하고자 한다. 대상 및 방법 : 본원에서 2011년 8월부터 2013년 7월까지 전립선 암으로 진단을 받고 Non-hormone, Definitive RT 70 Gy/28 fx을 처방받은 10명의 환자를 대상으로 하였다. 모의 치료 후 30분 뒤에 MRI영상을 획득하였으며, 획득 된 CT/MRI영상은 뼈를 중심으로 Philips pinnacle v9.2를 이용하여 융합하였다. 전립선 Balloon tube의 유무에 따른 전립선의 변화를 측정하기 위하여 Planning MRI, 진단용 MRI영상에서의 전립선 체적을 측정 비교하였으며, 각각의 영상에서 전립선의 모양의 변화를 측정하기 위해 전립선의 중심에서 상하, 앞뒤, 좌우방향에서의 직경을 측정 비교하였다. 결 과 : Planning MRI, 진단용 MRI영상에서의 전립선 체적을 비교한 결과 각각 평균 $25.01cm^3$(범위 $15.84-34.75cm^3$), $25.05cm^3$(범위 $15.28-35.88cm^3$)의 결과를 얻었다. Planning MRI 대비 진단용 MRI는 0.12 % 증가로 그 차이는 크지 않다는 것을 알 수가 있었다. 하지만 Planning MRI를 기준으로 Transition zone 방향으로 총 $7.46cm^3$(29 %) 체적의 증가가 있었으며, Peripheral zone 방향으로 $8.52cm^3$(34 %)의 체적 감소가 있었다. 전립선 중심의 2차원 영상에서의 상하, 앞뒤, 좌우방향의 직경을 측정한 결과 Planning MRI에서 평균 3.82cm, 2.38cm, 4.59cm의 값을 나타냈으며, 진단용 MRI에서는 평균 3.37cm, 2.76cm, 4.51cm의 값을 알 수 있었다. Planning MRI 기준으로 앞뒤 방향으로 0.38cm(13 %)감소하였으나 좌우 방향 0.08cm(1.6 %), 상하방향 0.45cm(13 %)가 증가되었다. 결 론 : 본 연구의 결과를 바탕으로 Planning MRI와 진단용 MRI에서의 전립선의 총 체적은 큰 차이를 보이지 않았지만 직장에 전립선 Balloon tube 삽입으로 인한 전립선의 모양 및 부분 체적의 변화를 알 수가 있었다. 따라서 CT/MRI 영상 융합 시 Planning MRI영상을 이용한다면 진단용 MRI영상과 비교하여 Transition zone에 증가하는 체적만큼 손실 없이 타겟을 CTV에 포함시킬 수 있으며, Balloon으로 인한 Peripheral zone 체적의 감소를 더 명확히 구분하여 직장에 전달되는 방사선량을 줄일 수 있을 것이다. 이에 본 저자는 전산화 치료 계획에서의 CT/MRI영상 융합 시 모의 치료 과정과 동일한 고정용구와 자세를 재현하여 MRI영상을 획득하는 것이 유용할 것이라 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Osamu T, Shinya H, Masayuki M: Comparison of MRIbased and CT/MRI fusion-based postimplant dosimetric analysis of prostate brachytherapy. Int. J. Radiation Oncology Biol. Phys, 2006;597-602
  2. Osamu T, Shinya H, Kota S: Importance of the CT/MRI fusion method as a learning tool for CT-based postimplant dosimetry in prostate brachytherapy. Radiotherapy and Oncology 81, 2006;303-308 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2006.10.014
  3. Kazufumi Kagawa, W.Robert lee, Timothy E: Initial clinical assessment of ct-mri image fusion software in localization of the prostate for 3d conformal radiation therapy. Int. j. radiation oncology biol. phys, 1997;319- 325
  4. Michael M, Sachi V, Ralph B: Magnetic resonance imaging(MRI) for localization of the prostatic apex: comparison to computed tomography(CT) and urethrography. Radiotherapy and Oncology, 1998;277- 284
  5. Kristina L, Ronald D, Jason O: Comparison of CT and MR-CT fusion for prostate post-implant dosimetry. Int. J. Radiation Oncology Biol. Phys, 2012;1912-1917
  6. Roel J, Kirsten E, Peter J: Reduction of dose delivered to the rectum and bulb of the penis using MRI delineation for radiotherapy of the prostate. Int. J. Radiation oncology Biol. PhyS, 2003;1269-1279
  7. Porter. A. T, Daly, H: Retrograde urographic technique in the radiotherapy treatment planning of prostate cancer. Med. Dosim, 1987;29-30
  8. Stijn W, Tom W, Emile N: Change in prostate shape and volume and their implications for radiotherapy after introduction of endorectal balloon as determined by MAI at 3T. Int. J. Radiation Oncology Biol. Phys, 2009;1446-1453
  9. Schild, S. E, Buskirk, S. J, Robinow, J. S: Prostate cancer: Retrograde urethrography to improve treatment planning for radiation therapy, Radiology, 1991;885-887
  10. Roach M, Faillace-Akazawa P, Malfatti C, el al: Prostate volumes defined by magnetic resonance imaging and computerized tomographic scans for three-dimentional conformal radiotherapy. Int. J. Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 1996;1011-1018
  11. Rasch C, Barillot I, Remeijer P, et al: Definition of the prostate in CT and MRI: A multi-observer study. Int. J. Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 1997;57-66
  12. Alfredo P, Federica C, Andrea V: MR and CT fusion for postimplant analysis in permanent prostate seed implants. Int. J. Radiation Oncology Biol, Phys, 2004;1572-1579
  13. Patrick W, Cheryl E, Mary F: Radiographic and anatomic basis for prostate contouring errors and methods to improve prostate contouring accuracy. Int. J. Radiation Oncology Biol. Phys, 2010;369-378
  14. Eric L, Karlissa S, Ashley W: Prostate contouring variation: can it be fixed?. Int. J. Radiation Oncology Biol. Phys, 2012;1923-1929
  15. Kagawa K, Lee WR, Schultheiss TE, et al: Initial clinical assessment of CT-MRI image fusion software in localization of the prostate for 3D conformal radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 1997;319-325
  16. Amdur RJ, Gladstone D, Leopold KA, et al: Prostate seed implant quality assessment using MR and CT image fusion. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 1999;67-72
  17. Tanaka O, Hayasi S, Matsuo M, et al: Comparison of MRI based and CT/MRI fusion-based postimplant dosimetric analysis of prostate brachytherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys, 2006;597-602
  18. Polo A, Cattani F, Vavassori A, et al: MR and CT image fusion for postimplant analysis in permanent prostate seed implants. Int J radiat Oncal Biol Phys, 2004;1572- 1579