Innovative integration of augmented reality and optical surface imaging: A coarse‐to‐precise system for radiotherapy positioning

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundTraditional methods of radiotherapy positioning have shortcomings such as fragile skin‐markers, additional doses, and lack of information integration. Emerging technologies may provide alternatives for the relevant clinical practice.PurposeTo propose a noninvasive radiotherapy positioning system integrating augmented reality (AR) and optical surface, and to evaluate its feasibility in clinical workflow.MethodsAR and structured light‐based surface were integrated to implement the coarse‐to‐precise positioning through two coherent steps, the AR‐based coarse guidance and the optical surface‐based precise verification. To implement quality assurance, recognition of face and pattern was used for patient authentication, case association, and accessory validation in AR scenes. The holographic images reconstructed from simulation computed tomography (CT) images, guided the initial posture correction by virtual‐real alignment. The point clouds of body surface were fused, with the calibration and pose estimation of structured light cameras, and segmented according to the preset regions of interest (ROIs). The global‐to‐local registration for cross‐source point clouds was achieved to calculate couch shifts in six degrees‐of‐freedom (DoF), which were ultimately transmitted to AR scenes. The evaluation based on phantom and human‐body (4 volunteers) included, (i) quality assurance workflow, (ii) errors of both steps and correlation analysis, (iii) receiver operating characteristic (ROC), (iv) distance characteristics of accuracy, and (v) clinical positioning efficiency.ResultsThe maximum errors in phantom evaluation were 3.4 ± 2.5 mm in Vrt and 1.4 ± 1.0° in Pitch for the coarse guidance step, while 1.6 ± 0.9 mm in Vrt and 0.6 ± 0.4° in Pitch for the precise verification step. The Pearson correlation coefficients between precise verification and cone beam CT (CBCT) results were distributed in the interval [0.81, 0.85]. In ROC analysis, the areas under the curve (AUC) were 0.87 and 0.89 for translation and rotation, respectively. In human body‐based evaluation, the errors of thorax and abdomen (T&A) were significantly greater than those of head and neck (H&N) in Vrt (2.6 ± 1.1 vs. 1.7 ± 0.8, p < 0.01), Lng (2.3 ± 1.1 vs. 1.4 ± 0.9, p < 0.01), and Rtn (0.8 ± 0.4 vs. 0.6 ± 0.3, p = 0.01) while relatively similar in Lat (1.8 ± 0.9 vs. 1.7 ± 0.8, p = 0.07). The translation displacement range, after coarse guidance step, required for high accuracy of the optical surface component of the integrated system was 0–42 mm, and the average positioning duration of the integrated system was significantly less than that of conventional workflow (355.7 ± 21.7 vs. 387.7 ± 26.6 s, p < 0.01).ConclusionsThe combination of AR and optical surface has utility and feasibility for patient positioning, in terms of both safety and accuracy.