Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparative Evaluation of 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography and 4-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Delineate the Target of Primary Liver Cancer
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparative Evaluation of 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography and 4-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Delineate the Target of Primary Liver Cancer
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparative Evaluation of 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography and 4-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Delineate the Target of Primary Liver Cancer
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparative Evaluation of 4-Dimensional Computed Tomography and 4-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Delineate the Target of Primary Liver Cancer
2021
Overview
Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility of 4-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging (4DMRI) in establishing the target of primary liver cancer in comparison with 4-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT). Methods and Materials: A total of 23 patients with primary liver cancer who received radiotherapy were selected, and 4DCT and T2w-4DMRI simulations were conducted to obtain 4DCT and T2w-4DMRI simulation images. The 4DCT and T2w-4DMRI data were sorted into 10 and 8 respiratory phase bins, respectively. The liver and gross tumor volumes (GTVs) were delineated in all images using programmed clinical workflows under tumor delineation guidelines. The internal organs at risk volumes (IRVs) and internal target volumes (ITVs) were the unions of all the phase livers and GTVs, respectively. Then, the artifacts, liver volume, GTV, and motion range in 4DCT and T2w-4DMRI were compared. Results: The mean GTV volume based on 4DMRI was 136.42 ± 231.27 cm3, which was 25.04 cm3 (15.5%) less than that of 4DCT (161.46 ± 280.29 cm3). The average volume of ITV determined by 4DMRI was 166.12 ± 270.43 cm3, which was 22.44 cm3 (11.9%) less than that determined by 4DCT (188.56 ± 307.57 cm3). Liver volume and IRV in 4DMRI increased by 4.0% and 6.6%, respectively, compared with 4DCT. The difference in tumor motion by T2w-4DMRI based on the centroid was greater than that of 4DCT in the L/R, A/P, and S/I directions, and the average displacement differences were 2.6, 2.8, and 6.9 mm, respectively. The severe artifacts in 4DCT were 47.8% (11/23) greater than in 4DMRI 17.4% (4/23). Conclusions: Compared with 4DCT, T2-weighted and navigator-triggered 4DMRI produces fewer artifacts and larger motion differences in hepatic intrafraction tumors, which is a feasible technique for primary liver cancer treatment planning.
Publisher
SAGE Publications,Sage Publications Ltd,SAGE Publishing
