Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: Comparison between electromagnetic transponders and radiographic imaging for prostate localization: A pelvic phantom study with rotations and translations.
Authors: Hamilton, Daniel
McKenzie, Dean
Perkins, Anne
Keywords: Calypso®, kV Orthogonal Imaging
Cone-Beam Computed Tomography
Rotational Accuracy
Prostatic Neoplasms
Organ Motion
Prostate Radiotherapy
Anthropomorphic Pelvic Phantom
Prostate Motion
Research, Development and Governance, Epworth Healthcare, Melbourne, Australia
Epworth Radiation Oncology, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Issue Date: Jul-2017
Publisher: Wiley
Citation: J Appl Clin Med Phys. 12 July 2017; xx:1–11
Abstract: The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in target localization between Calypso®, kV orthogonal imaging and cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) for combined translations and rotations of an anthropomorphic pelvic phantom. The phantom was localized using all three systems in 50 different positions, with applied translational and rotational offsets randomly sampled from representative normal distributions of prostate motion. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (ρc) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to assess the agreement between the localization systems. Mean differences and difference vectors between the three systems were also calculated. Agreement between systems for lateral, vertical, and longitudinal translations was excellent, with ρc values of greater than 0.98 between all three systems in all axes. There was excellent agreement between the systems for rotations around the lateral axis (pitch) (ρc > 0.99), and around the vertical axis (yaw) (ρc > 0.97). However, somewhat poorer agreement for rotations around the longitudinal axis (roll) was observed, with the lowest correlation observed between Calypso and kV orthogonal imaging (ρc = 0.895). Mean differences between the phantom position reported by Calypso and the radiographic systems were less than 1 mm and 1° for all translations and rotations. The results for translations are consistent with the publications of previous authors. There is no comparable published data for rotations. While there is lower correlation between the three systems for roll than for the other angles, the mean differences in reported rotations are not clinically significant.
DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12119
PubMed URL:
ISSN: 1526-9914
Journal Title: Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
Type: Journal Article
Affiliated Organisations: School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia
Type of Clinical Study or Trial: Comparative Study
Appears in Collections:Epworth Prostate Centre
Radiation Oncology

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Hamilton_et_al-2017-Journal_of_Applied_Clinical_Medical_Physics.pdf949.05 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in Epworth are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.