Estimating follow‐up CTs from geometric deformations of catheter implants in interstitial breast brachytherapy: A feasibility study using electromagnetic tracking

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundElectromagnetic tracking (EMT) systems have been shown to provide valuable information on the geometry of catheter implants in breast cancer patients undergoing interstitial brachytherapy (iBT). In the context of an extended patient‐specific, pre‐treatment verification, EMT can play a key role in determining the potential need and, if applicable, the appropriate time for treatment adaptation. To detect dosimetric shortcomings the relative position between catheters, and target volume and critical structures must be known. Since EMT cannot provide the anatomical context and standard imaging techniques such as cone‐beam CT are not yet available in most brachytherapy suites, it is not possible to detect anatomic changes on a daily or fraction basis, so the need for adaptive planning cannot be identified.PurposeThe aim of this feasibility study is to develop and evaluate a technique capable of estimating follow‐up CTs at any time based on the initial treatment planning CT (PCT) and surrogate information about changes of the implant geometry from an EMT system.MethodsA deformation vector field is calculated from two different implant reconstructions acquired in treatment position through EMT, the first immediately after the PCT and the second at another time point during the course of treatment. The calculation is based on discrete displacement vectors of pairs of control and target points. These are extrapolated by means of different radial basis functions in order to cover the entire CT volume. The adequate parameters for the calculation of the deformation field were identified. By warping the PCT according to the deformation field, one obtains an estimated CT (ECT) that reflects the geometric changes. For the proof of concept, ECTs were computed for the time point of the clinical follow‐up CT (FCT) that is embedded in the treatment workflow after the fourth fraction.ResultsECT and clinical FCTs of 20 patients were compared to each other quantitatively in terms of absolute Hounsfield unit differences in the planning target volume (PTV) and in a convex hull (CH) enclosing the catheters. The median differences were 31.2  and 29.5 HU for the CH and the PTV, respectively.ConclusionThe proposed ECT approach was able to approximate the “anatomy of the day” and therefore, in principle, allows a dosimetric appraisal of the treatment plan quality before each fraction. In this way, it can contribute to a more detailed patient‐specific quality assurance in iBT of the breast and help to identify the timing for a potential treatment adaptation.