Quality Assurance of Ultrasound Imaging Systems for Target Localization and Online Setup Corrections

Wolfgang A. Tome, Nigel P. Orton

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We describe quality assurance paradigms for ultrasound imaging systems for target localization (UISTL). To determine the absolute localization accuracy of a UISTL, an absolute coordinate system can be established in the treatment room and spherical targets at various depths can be localized. To test the ability of such a system to determine the magnitude of internal organ motion, a phantom that mimics the human male pelvic anatomy can be used to simulate different organ motion ranges. To assess the interuser variability of ultrasound (US) guidance, different experienced users can independently determine the daily organ shifts for the same patients for a number of consecutive fractions. The average accuracy for a UISTL for the localization of spherical targets at various depths has been found to be 0.57 ± 0.47 mm in each spatial dimension for various focal depths. For the phantom organ motion test it was found that the true organ motion could be determined to within 1.0 mm along each axis. The variability between different experienced users who localized the same 5 patients for five consecutive fractions was small in comparison to the indicated shifts. In addition to the quality assurance tests that address the ability of a UISTL to accurately localize a target, a thorough quality assurance program should also incorporate the following two aspects to ensure consistent and accurate localization in daily clinical use: (1) adequate training and performance monitoring of users of the US target localization system, and (2) prescreening of patients who may not be good candidates for US localization.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
Volume71
Issue number1 SUPPL.
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2008
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

assurance
Ultrasonography
organs
Articular Range of Motion
Anatomy
anatomy
shift
rooms
education
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Image-guided therapy
  • Quality assurance
  • Ultrasound

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiation

Cite this

@article{63783a913003400c921cca8d5612f7f2,
title = "Quality Assurance of Ultrasound Imaging Systems for Target Localization and Online Setup Corrections",
abstract = "We describe quality assurance paradigms for ultrasound imaging systems for target localization (UISTL). To determine the absolute localization accuracy of a UISTL, an absolute coordinate system can be established in the treatment room and spherical targets at various depths can be localized. To test the ability of such a system to determine the magnitude of internal organ motion, a phantom that mimics the human male pelvic anatomy can be used to simulate different organ motion ranges. To assess the interuser variability of ultrasound (US) guidance, different experienced users can independently determine the daily organ shifts for the same patients for a number of consecutive fractions. The average accuracy for a UISTL for the localization of spherical targets at various depths has been found to be 0.57 ± 0.47 mm in each spatial dimension for various focal depths. For the phantom organ motion test it was found that the true organ motion could be determined to within 1.0 mm along each axis. The variability between different experienced users who localized the same 5 patients for five consecutive fractions was small in comparison to the indicated shifts. In addition to the quality assurance tests that address the ability of a UISTL to accurately localize a target, a thorough quality assurance program should also incorporate the following two aspects to ensure consistent and accurate localization in daily clinical use: (1) adequate training and performance monitoring of users of the US target localization system, and (2) prescreening of patients who may not be good candidates for US localization.",
keywords = "Image-guided therapy, Quality assurance, Ultrasound",
author = "Tome, {Wolfgang A.} and Orton, {Nigel P.}",
year = "2008",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.05.088",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "71",
journal = "International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics",
issn = "0360-3016",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1 SUPPL.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quality Assurance of Ultrasound Imaging Systems for Target Localization and Online Setup Corrections

AU - Tome, Wolfgang A.

AU - Orton, Nigel P.

PY - 2008/5/1

Y1 - 2008/5/1

N2 - We describe quality assurance paradigms for ultrasound imaging systems for target localization (UISTL). To determine the absolute localization accuracy of a UISTL, an absolute coordinate system can be established in the treatment room and spherical targets at various depths can be localized. To test the ability of such a system to determine the magnitude of internal organ motion, a phantom that mimics the human male pelvic anatomy can be used to simulate different organ motion ranges. To assess the interuser variability of ultrasound (US) guidance, different experienced users can independently determine the daily organ shifts for the same patients for a number of consecutive fractions. The average accuracy for a UISTL for the localization of spherical targets at various depths has been found to be 0.57 ± 0.47 mm in each spatial dimension for various focal depths. For the phantom organ motion test it was found that the true organ motion could be determined to within 1.0 mm along each axis. The variability between different experienced users who localized the same 5 patients for five consecutive fractions was small in comparison to the indicated shifts. In addition to the quality assurance tests that address the ability of a UISTL to accurately localize a target, a thorough quality assurance program should also incorporate the following two aspects to ensure consistent and accurate localization in daily clinical use: (1) adequate training and performance monitoring of users of the US target localization system, and (2) prescreening of patients who may not be good candidates for US localization.

AB - We describe quality assurance paradigms for ultrasound imaging systems for target localization (UISTL). To determine the absolute localization accuracy of a UISTL, an absolute coordinate system can be established in the treatment room and spherical targets at various depths can be localized. To test the ability of such a system to determine the magnitude of internal organ motion, a phantom that mimics the human male pelvic anatomy can be used to simulate different organ motion ranges. To assess the interuser variability of ultrasound (US) guidance, different experienced users can independently determine the daily organ shifts for the same patients for a number of consecutive fractions. The average accuracy for a UISTL for the localization of spherical targets at various depths has been found to be 0.57 ± 0.47 mm in each spatial dimension for various focal depths. For the phantom organ motion test it was found that the true organ motion could be determined to within 1.0 mm along each axis. The variability between different experienced users who localized the same 5 patients for five consecutive fractions was small in comparison to the indicated shifts. In addition to the quality assurance tests that address the ability of a UISTL to accurately localize a target, a thorough quality assurance program should also incorporate the following two aspects to ensure consistent and accurate localization in daily clinical use: (1) adequate training and performance monitoring of users of the US target localization system, and (2) prescreening of patients who may not be good candidates for US localization.

KW - Image-guided therapy

KW - Quality assurance

KW - Ultrasound

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=41749123732&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=41749123732&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.05.088

DO - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.05.088

M3 - Article

C2 - 18406938

AN - SCOPUS:41749123732

VL - 71

JO - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

JF - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics

SN - 0360-3016

IS - 1 SUPPL.

ER -