Impact of Acquisition Protocols on Accuracy of Dose Calculation Based on XVI Cone Beam Computed Tomography

Slimani Souleyman; Khalal Dorea Maria; Tyeb Cheikh; Khalal-Kouache Karima

doi:10.4103/jmp.JMP_128_20

Impact of Acquisition Protocols on Accuracy of Dose Calculation Based on XVI Cone Beam Computed Tomography

J Med Phys. 2021 Apr-Jun;46(2):94-104. doi: 10.4103/jmp.JMP_128_20. Epub 2021 Aug 7.

Authors

Slimani Souleyman^{1

2}, Khalal Dorea Maria³, Tyeb Cheikh¹, Khalal-Kouache Karima²

Affiliations

¹ Department of Radiotherapy, HCA Hospital, Kouba, Algeria.
² SNIRM Laboratory, Faculty of Physics, University of Sciences and Technology Houari Boumediene, Algiers, ALGERIA.
³ Dosage, Analyse and Characterisation in High Resolution Laboratory, Department of Physics, Ferhat Abbas Setif 1 University, Setif, Algeria.

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this work is to study the impact of acquisition protocols on the accuracy of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT)-based dose calculation and to determinate its limits from image characteristics such as image quality, Hounsfield numbers consistency, and restrictive sizes of volume acquisition, compared to the CT imaging for the different anatomy localizations: head and neck (H&N), thorax, and pelvis.

Materials and methods: In this work, we used a routine on-board imaging CBCT of the XVI system (Elekta, Stockholm, Sweden). Dosimetric calculations performed on CT images require the knowledge of the Hounsfield unit-relative electron density (HU-ReD) calibration curve, which is determined for each imaging technology and must be adapted to the imaging acquisition parameters (filter/field of view). The accuracy of the dose calculation from CBCT images strongly depends on the quality of these images and also on the appropriate correspondence to the electronic densities, which will be used by the treatment planning system to simulate the dose distribution. In this study, we evaluated the accuracy of the dose calculation for each protocol, as already pointed in many studies.

Results: As a result, the protocols that give better results in terms of dose calculation are F0S20 for the H&N region and F1M20 for the thoracic and pelvic regions, with an error <2% compared to results obtained with CT images. In addition, the dose distributions obtained with CT and CBCT imaging modalities were compared by two different methods. The first comparison was done by gamma index in three planes (sagittal, coronal, and transverse) with 2%; 2 mm criteria. The results showed good correspondence, with more than 95% of points passed the criteria. We also compared the target volume, the organs at risk (OARs), and the maximum and minimum doses for the three localizations (H&N, thorax, and pelvis) in CT and CBCT imaging modalities using a Rando phantom.

Conclusions: The choice of the adequate CBCT acquisition protocol and the appropriate phantom to determine the HU-ReD calibration curve provides a better precision in the calculation of dose on CBCT images. This allows improving the results obtained when using the HU-ReD calibration method for dose calculation in adaptive radiotherapy.

Keywords: Adaptive radiotherapy; Hounsfield units; calibration curve; cone beam computed tomography.