RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Electromagnetic tracking (EMT) is a promising technology for automated catheter and applicator reconstructions in brachytherapy. In this work, a proof-of-concept is presented for reconstruction of the individual channels of a new shielded tandem (140 mm long shield) dedicated to intensity-modulated brachytherapy. METHODS: All six channels of a straight prototype were reconstructed using an electromagnetic (EM) system from Aurora (NDI, Waterloo, ON, Canada). The influence of the shield on the EMT system was characterized by taking measurements at nine different positions with and without the shielded part of the applicator next to the probe. A Student t-test was used to analyze the data. RESULTS: For registration purposes, the center-to-center distance (4 mm) was taken from the computed-assisted design (CAD) structure. The computed interchannel distances from the three opposite pairs were 4.33 ± 0.40 mm, 4.14 ± 0.35 mm, and 3.88 ± 0.26 mm. All interchannel distances were within the geometrical tolerance in the shielded portion of the applicator (±0.6 mm) and account for the fact that the sensor (0.8 mm diameter) was smaller than the channel diameter. According to the paired Student t-test, the data given by the EM system with and without the shielded applicator tip are not significantly different. CONCLUSION: This study shows that the reconstruction of channel path is possible within the mechanical accuracy of the applicator.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: New technologies were integrated into a novel treatment platform combining electromagnetically (EM) tracked catheters, a 3D ultrasound (3DUS) imaging device, and a new treatment planning system to provide a real-time prostate high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy treatment system. This work defines workflows for offline CT and online 3DUS planning scenarios and preclinical end-to-end validation of the platform. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The platform is composed of an EM-tracked stylet, a EM-tracked 3DUS probe, and an EM-tracked template guide, all used with the NDI Aurora field generator (NDI, Ontario, Canada). The treatment planning system performs continuous position and angular readings from all three EM sensors into a streamlined environment that allows for (1) contouring; (2) planning; (3) catheter insertion guidance and reconstruction; (4) QA of catheter path and tip position; and (5) exporting to an afterloader. Data were gathered on the times required for the various key steps of the 3DUS-based workflow. RESULTS: The complete 3DUS-based workflow on 16-catheter implant phantoms took approximately 15 min. This time is expected to increase for actual patients. Plan generation is fast (7.6 ± 2.5s) and the initial catheter reconstruction with updated dose distribution is obtained at no (time) cost as part of the insertion process. Subsequent catheter reconstruction takes on average 10.5 ± 3.1s per catheter, representing less than 3 min for a 16-catheter implant. CONCLUSIONS: This preclinical study suggests that EM technology could help to significantly streamline real-time US-based high-dose-rate prostate brachytherapy.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Accurate insertion and overall needle positioning are key requirements for effective brachytherapy treatments. This work aims at demonstrating the accuracy performance and the suitability of the Aurora(®) V1 Planar Field Generator (PFG) electromagnetic tracking system (EMTS) for real-time treatment assistance in interstitial brachytherapy procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The system's performance was characterized in two distinct studies. First, in an environment free of EM disturbance, the boundaries of the detection volume of the EMTS were characterized and a tracking error analysis was performed. Secondly, a distortion analysis was conducted as a means of assessing the tracking accuracy performance of the system in the presence of potential EM disturbance generated by the proximity of standard brachytherapy components. RESULTS: The tracking accuracy experiments showed that positional errors were typically 2 ± 1 mm in a zone restricted to the first 30 cm of the detection volume. However, at the edges of the detection volume, sensor position errors of up to 16 mm were recorded. On the other hand, orientation errors remained low at ± 2° for most of the measurements. The EM distortion analysis showed that the presence of typical brachytherapy components in vicinity of the EMTS had little influence on tracking accuracy. Position errors of less than 1 mm were recorded with all components except with a metallic arm support, which induced a mean absolute error of approximately 1.4 mm when located 10 cm away from the needle sensor. CONCLUSIONS: The Aurora(®) V1 PFG EMTS possesses a great potential for real-time treatment assistance in general interstitial brachytherapy. In view of our experimental results, we however recommend that the needle axis remains as parallel as possible to the generator surface during treatment and that the tracking zone be restricted to the first 30 cm from the generator surface.

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: In high dose rate brachytherapy (HDR-B), current catheter reconstruction protocols are relatively slow and error prone. The purpose of this technical note is to evaluate the accuracy and the robustness of an electromagnetic (EM) tracking system for automated and real-time catheter reconstruction. METHODS: For this preclinical study, a total of ten catheters were inserted in gelatin phantoms with different trajectories. Catheters were reconstructed using a 18G biopsy needle, used as an EM stylet and equipped with a miniaturized sensor, and the second generation Aurora(®) Planar Field Generator from Northern Digital Inc. The Aurora EM system provides position and orientation value with precisions of 0.7 mm and 0.2°, respectively. Phantoms were also scanned using a µCT (GE Healthcare) and Philips Big Bore clinical computed tomography (CT) system with a spatial resolution of 89 µm and 2 mm, respectively. Reconstructions using the EM stylet were compared to µCT and CT. To assess the robustness of the EM reconstruction, five catheters were reconstructed twice and compared. RESULTS: Reconstruction time for one catheter was 10 s, leading to a total reconstruction time inferior to 3 min for a typical 17-catheter implant. When compared to the µCT, the mean EM tip identification error was 0.69 ± 0.29 mm while the CT error was 1.08 ± 0.67 mm. The mean 3D distance error was found to be 0.66 ± 0.33 mm and 1.08 ± 0.72 mm for the EM and CT, respectively. EM 3D catheter trajectories were found to be more accurate. A maximum difference of less than 0.6 mm was found between successive EM reconstructions. CONCLUSIONS: The EM reconstruction was found to be more accurate and precise than the conventional methods used for catheter reconstruction in HDR-B. This approach can be applied to any type of catheters and applicators.

Asunto(s)