We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
To investigate the performance of image registration methods for structure delineation in head and neck (H&N) cancer patients.
Methods and materials:
This retrospective study randomly recruited 22 patients who had been irradiated in the H&N region between January 2016 and February 2024. The sample group included nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) and oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) patients. The treatment planning structures were delineated as images of computed tomography simulation (CTsim) and were set as the ground-truth. The latest CT diagnostic (CTdiag) image sets of these selected patients were imported into third-party software for delineation. The structures of CTdiag were delineated using an artificial intelligence method except for the target. The performance of rigid and deformable image registration methods (RIR and DIR, respectively) between these two image sets were evaluated using dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and Hausdorff distance (HD). The performance evaluation scores were also compared between NPC and OPC.
Result:
The DSC revealed a significant difference in all structures between RIR and DIR, whereas the HD showed no significant difference on the target and the larynx. In terms of a comparison of treatment regions, OPC appeared to sustain the greatest benefit from DIR.
Conclusion:
Image registration can provide the benefit of structure delineation, particularly when employing the DIR method. Although the DIR method may not offer a high degree of performance in terms of target delineation, it could effectively serve as a delineation guideline in this process.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.