Mechanically assisted non-invasive ventilation for liver SABR: Improve CBCT, treat more accurately
Background and purpose: Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) for image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) during liver stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is degraded by respiratory motion artefacts, potentially jeopardising treatment accuracy. Mechanically assisted non-invasive ventilation-induced br...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Elsevier
2025-07-01
|
| Series: | Clinical and Translational Radiation Oncology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405630825000758 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Background and purpose: Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) for image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT) during liver stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) is degraded by respiratory motion artefacts, potentially jeopardising treatment accuracy. Mechanically assisted non-invasive ventilation-induced breath-hold (MANIV-BH) can reduce these artefacts. This study compares MANIV-BH and free-breathing CBCTs regarding image quality, IGRT variability, automatic registration accuracy, and deep-learning auto-segmentation performance. Materials and methods: Liver SABR CBCTs were presented blindly to 14 operators: 25 patients with FB and 25 with MANIV-BH. They rated CBCT quality and IGRT ease (rigid registration with planning CT). Interoperator IGRT variability was compared between FB and MANIV-BH. Automatic gross tumour volume (GTV) mapping accuracy was compared using automatic rigid registration and image-guided deformable registration. Deep-learning organ-at-risk (OAR) auto-segmentation was rated by an operator, who recorded the time dedicated for manual correction of these volumes. Results: MANIV-BH significantly improved CBCT image quality (“Excellent”/“Good”: 83.4 % versus 25.4 % with FB, p < 0.001), facilitated IGRT (“Very easy”/“Easy”: 68.0 % versus 38.9 % with FB, p < 0.001), and reduced IGRT variability, particularly for trained operators (overall variability of 3.2 mm versus 4.6 mm with FB, p = 0.010). MANIV-BH improved deep-learning auto-segmentation performance (80.0 % rated “Excellent”/“Good” versus 4.0 % with FB, p < 0.001), and reduced median manual correction time by 54.2 % compared to FB (p < 0.001). However, automatic GTV mapping accuracy was not significantly different between MANIV-BH and FB. Conclusion: In liver SABR, MANIV-BH significantly improves CBCT quality, reduces interoperator IGRT variability, and enhances OAR auto-segmentation. Beyond being safe and effective for respiratory motion mitigation, MANIV increases accuracy during treatment delivery, although its implementation requires resources. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2405-6308 |