DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

In-House Developed Surface-Guided Repositioning and Monitoring System to Complement In-Room Patient Positioning System for Spine Radiosurgery

  • Kim, Kwang Hyeon (Department of Neurosurgery, Neuroscience & Radiosurgery Hybrid Research Center, Inje University Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Haenghwa (Department of Neurosurgery, Neuroscience & Radiosurgery Hybrid Research Center, Inje University Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine) ;
  • Sohn, Moon-Jun (Department of Neurosurgery, Neuroscience & Radiosurgery Hybrid Research Center, Inje University Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine) ;
  • Mun, Chi-Woong (Department of Biomedical Engineering, U-Health Research Center, Inje University)
  • Received : 2021.03.25
  • Accepted : 2021.06.08
  • Published : 2021.06.30

Abstract

Purpose: This study aimed to develop a surface-guided radiosurgery system customized for a neurosurgery clinic that could be used as an auxiliary system for improving the accuracy, monitoring the movements of patients while performing hypofractionated radiosurgery, and minimizing the geometric misses. Methods: RGB-D cameras were installed in the treatment room and a monitoring system was constructed to perform a three-dimensional (3D) scan of the body surface of the patient and to express it as a point cloud. This could be used to confirm the exact position of the body of the patient and monitor their movements during radiosurgery. The image from the system was matched with the computed tomography (CT) image, and the positional accuracy was compared and analyzed in relation to the existing system to evaluate the accuracy of the setup. Results: The user interface was configured to register the patient and display the setup image to position the setup location by matching the 3D points on the body of the patient with the CT image. The error rate for the position difference was within 1-mm distance (min, -0.21 mm; max, 0.63 mm). Compared with the existing system, the differences were found to be as follows: x=0.08 mm, y=0.13 mm, and z=0.26 mm. Conclusions: We developed a surface-guided repositioning and monitoring system that can be customized and applied in a radiation surgery environment with an existing linear accelerator. It was confirmed that this system could be easily applied for accurate patient repositioning and inter-treatment motion monitoring.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This work was supported by the 2017 Inje University research grant.

References

  1. Li G, Ballangrud A, Kuo LC, Kang H, Kirov A, Lovelock M, et al. Motion monitoring for cranial frameless stereotactic radiosurgery using video-based three-dimensional optical surface imaging. Med Phys. 2011;38:3981-3994. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3596526
  2. Tagaste B, Riboldi M, Spadea MF, Bellante S, Baroni G, Cambria R, et al. Comparison between infrared optical and stereoscopic X-ray technologies for patient setup in image guided stereotactic radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82:1706-1714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.04.004
  3. Wang LT, Solberg TD, Medin PM, Boone R. Infrared patient positioning for stereotactic radiosurgery of extracranial tumors. Comput Biol Med. 2001;31:101-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-4825(00)00026-3
  4. Schipani S, Wen W, Jin JY, Kim JK, Ryu S. Spine radiosurgery: a dosimetric analysis in 124 patients who received 18 Gy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;84:e571-e576. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.06.049
  5. Wu VW, Ho YY, Tang YS, Lam PW, Yeung HK, Lee SW. Comparison of the verification performance and radiation dose between ExacTrac x-ray system and On-Board Imager-a phantom study. Med Dosim. 2019;44:15-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2017.12.008
  6. Murphy MJ, Balter J, Balter S, BenComo JA Jr, Das IJ, Jiang SB, et al. The management of imaging dose during image-guided radiotherapy: report of the AAPM Task Group 75. Med Phys. 2007;34:4041-4063. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2775667
  7. Cheng CS, Jong WL, Ung NM, Wong JHD. Evaluation of imaging dose from different image guided systems during head and neck radiotherapy: a phantom study. Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2017;175:357-362.
  8. Steiner E, Stock M, Kostresevic B, Ableitinger A, Jelen U, Prokesch H, et al. Imaging dose assessment for IGRT in particle beam therapy. Radiother Oncol. 2013;109:409-413. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2013.09.007
  9. Hoisak JDP, Pawlicki T. The role of optical surface imaging systems in radiation therapy. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2018;28:185-193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semradonc.2018.02.003
  10. Freislederer P, Kugele M, Ollers M, Swinnen A, Sauer TO, Bert C, et al. Recent advanced in surface guided radiation therapy. Radiat Oncol. 2020;15:187. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-020-01629-w
  11. Li J, Shi W, Andrews D, Werner-Wasik M, Lu B, Yu Y, et al. Comparison of online 6 degree-of-freedom image registration of Varian TrueBeam cone-beam CT and BrainLab ExacTrac X-ray for intracranial radiosurgery. Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2017;16:339-343. https://doi.org/10.1177/1533034616683069
  12. Laaksomaa M, Sarudis S, Rossi M, Lehtonen T, Pehkonen J, Remes J, et al. AlignRT® and CatalystTM in whole-breast radiotherapy with DIBH: is IGRT still needed? J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019;20:97-104. https://doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12553
  13. Agazaryan N, Tenn S, Dieterich S, Gevaert T, Goetsch SJ, Kaprealian T. Frameless image guidance in stereotactic radiosurgery. Stereotactic and Functional Neurosurgery. Cham: Springer; 2020:37-48.
  14. Manger RP, Paxton AB, Pawlicki T, Kim GY. Failure mode and effects analysis and fault tree analysis of surface image guided cranial radiosurgery. Med Phys. 2015;42:2449-2461. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4918319
  15. Gilles M, Fayad H, Miglierini P, Clement JF, Scheib S, Cozzi L, et al. Patient positioning in radiotherapy based on surface imaging using time of flight cameras. Med Phys. 2016;43:4833. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4959536
  16. Padilla L, Pearson EA, Pelizzari CA. Collision prediction software for radiotherapy treatments. Med Phys. 2015;42:6448-6456. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4932628
  17. Hoole AC, Twyman N, Langmack KA, Hebbard M, Lowrie D. Laser scanning of patient outlines for three-dimensional radiotherapy treatment planning. Physiol Meas. 2001;22:605-610. https://doi.org/10.1088/0967-3334/22/3/316
  18. Roessler K, Ungersboeck K, Dietrich W, Aichholzer M, Hittmeir K, Matula C, et al. Frameless stereotactic guided neurosurgery: clinical experience with an infrared based pointer device navigation system. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1997;139:551-559. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02750999
  19. Kosugi Y, Watanabe E, Goto J, Watanabe T, Yoshimoto S, Takakura K, et al. An articulated neurosurgical navigation system using MRI and CT images. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1988;35:147-152. https://doi.org/10.1109/10.1353
  20. Fan Y, Jiang D, Wang M, Song Z. A new markerless patientto-image registration method using a portable 3D scanner. Med Phys. 2014;41:101910. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4895847
  21. Giancola S, Valenti M, Sala R. A survey on 3D cameras: metrological comparison of time-of-flight, structuredlight and active stereoscopy technologies. Cham: Springer; 2018.
  22. He Y, Liang B, Yang J, Li S, He J. An iterative closest points algorithm for registration of 3D laser scanner point clouds with geometric features. Sensors (Basel). 2017;17:1862. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17081862
  23. Habib A, Detchev I, Bang K. A comparative analysis of two approaches for multiple-surface registration of irregular point clouds. Paper presented at: The 2010 Canadian Geomatics Conference and Symposium of Commission I; 2010 Jun 15-18; Calgary, Canada. p. 39.
  24. Rusu RB, Cousins S. 3D is here: Point Cloud Library (PCL). Paper presented at: 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation; 2011 May 9-13; Shanghai, China.
  25. Arun KS, Huang TS, Blostein SD. Least-squares fitting of two 3-D point sets. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 1987;PAMI-9:698-700. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.1987.4767965
  26. Ge Y, Maurer Jr CR, Fitzpatrick JM. Surface-based 3D image registration using the iterative closest-point algorithm with a closest-point transform Medical Imaging 1996: Image Processing. SPIE Digital Library; 1996:358-367.
  27. Wu ML, Chien JC, Wu CT, Lee JD. An augmented reality system using improved-iterative closest point algorithm for on-patient medical image visualization. Sensors (Basel). 2018;18:2505. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18082505
  28. Tehrani JN, O'Brien RT, Poulsen PR, Keall P. Real-time estimation of prostate tumor rotation and translation with a kV imaging system based on an iterative closest point algorithm. Phys Med Biol. 2013;58:8517-8533. https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/58/23/8517
  29. Huttenlocher DP, Klanderman GA, Rucklidge WJ. Comparing images using the Hausdorff distance. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 1993;15:850-863. https://doi.org/10.1109/34.232073
  30. Wang G, Li Z, Li G, Dai G, Xiao Q, Bai L, et al. Real-time liver tracking algorithm based on LSTM and SVR networks for use in surface-guided radiation therapy. Radiat Oncol. 2021;16:13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-020-01729-7
  31. Covington EL, Popple RA. A low-cost method to assess the performance of surface guidance imaging systems at nonzero couch angles. Cureus. 2021;13:e14278.
  32. Chan A, Coutts B, Parent E, Lou E. Development and evaluation of CT-to-3D ultrasound image registration algorithm in vertebral phantoms for spine surgery. Ann Biomed Eng. 2021;49:310-321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-020-02546-5
  33. Wang S, Sun HY, Guo HC, Du L, Liu TJ. Multi-view laser point cloud global registration for a single object. Sensors (Basel). 2018;18:3729. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18113729
  34. Li J, Zhou Q, Li X, Chen R, Ni K. An improved low-noise processing methodology combined with PCL for industry inspection based on laser line scanner. Sensors (Basel). 2019;19:3398. https://doi.org/10.3390/s19153398
  35. Liu W, Cheung Y, Sabouri P, Arai TJ, Sawant A, Ruan D. A continuous surface reconstruction method on point cloud captured from a 3D surface photogrammetry system. Med Phys. 2015;42:6564-6571. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4933196
  36. Fan Y, Yao X, Hu T, Xu X. An automatic spatial registration method for image-guided neurosurgery system. J Craniofac Surg. 2019;30:e344-e350. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000005330
  37. Muralikrishnan B, Rachakonda P, Lee V, Shilling M, Sawyer D, Cheok G, et al. Relative range error evaluation of terrestrial laser scanners using a plate, a sphere, and a novel dual-sphere-plate target. Meas Sci Technol. 2017;111:60-68.
  38. Maier-Hein L, Franz AM, dos Santos TR, Schmidt M, Fangerau M, Meinzer HP, et al. Convergent iterative closest-point algorithm to accomodate anisotropic and inhomogenous localization error. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2011;34:1520-1532. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2011.248
  39. Liu W. LiDAR-IMU time delay calibration based on iterative closest point and iterated sigma point Kalman filter. Sensors (Basel). 2017;17:539. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17030539
  40. Coroiu ADCA, Coroiu A. Interchangeability of Kinect and Orbbec sensors for gesture recognition. Paper presented at: 2018 IEEE 14th International Conference on Intelligent Computer Communication and Processing (ICCP); 2018 Sep 6-8; Cluj-Napoca, Romania. p. 309-315.
  41. Wiersma RD, Tomarken SL, Grelewicz Z, Belcher AH, Kang H. Spatial and temporal performance of 3D optical surface imaging for real-time head position tracking. Med Phys. 2013;40:111712. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4823757