METHOD FOR RECONSTRUCTION OF LIMITED DATA IMAGES USING FUSION-ALIGNED REPROJECTION AND NORMAL-ERROR-ALIGNED
REPROJECTION
Cross-Reference to Related Applications This application is a continuation in part of U.S. Application No. 09/802,468,
filed March 9, 2001, entitled "System and Method for Fusion- Aligned Reprojection of
Incomplete Data," the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by reference.
Background of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to radiation therapy equipment for the
treatment of tumors, and more particularly to methods for reconstructing incomplete patient data for radiation therapy and treatment verification.
Medical equipment for radiation therapy treats tumorous tissue with high energy
radiation. The amount of radiation and its placement must be accurately controlled to ensure both that the tumor receives sufficient radiation to be destroyed, and that the
damage to the surrounding and adjacent non-tumorous tissue is minimized.
External source radiation therapy uses a radiation source that is external to the
patient to treat internal tumors. The external source is normally collimated to direct a
beam only to the tumorous site. Typically, the tumor will be treated from multiple angles with the intensity and shape of the beam adjusted appropriately. The source of high
energy radiation may be x-rays or electrons from a linear accelerator in the range of 2-25
MeV, or gamma rays from a highly focused radioisotope such as Co60 source having an energy of 1.25 MeV.
One form of external radiation therapy uses the precision of a computed
tomography (CT) scanner to irradiate cancerous tissue in addition to acquiring CT images
immediately before, immediately after, and/or during radiation treatment delivery. It is
particularly useful to have online CT imaging capability integrated into a radiotherapy
delivery system since it helps identify changes in a patient's position and anatomy
between the time of imaging and treatment. However, many current patient imaging
systems, especially ones that are integrated into radiotherapy treatment systems suffer
from a limited field-of-view (LFON) in that collected imaging data does not encompass
the patient's complete cross-section. This LFON can cause visibility problems with the images, images with artifacts, images with distorted values, and affect applications that use these images, including dose calculations, delivery verification, deformable patient
registration, deformable dose registration, contouring (automatic, manual, or template-
based).
Intensity modulated radiation therapy uses intensity modulated radiation beams
that enter the patient's body at a greater number of angles and positions than conventional
therapies, thereby lessening the amount of radiation that healthy tissues are subjected to
and concentrating the radiation where it is needed most, at the cancer site(s). Essentially, the radiation field is "sculpted" to match the shape of the cancerous tissue and to keep the dose of radiation to healthy tissue near the cancer low. This type of radiotherapy greatly
benefits from visualization of a patient's internal anatomy and accurate calculation of the
delivered radiation dose. A radiation treatment plan may be based on a CT image of the patient. As is known in the art, a CT image is produced by a mathematical reconstruction
of many projection images obtained at different angles about the patient, h a typical CT
image, the projections are one-dimensional line profiles indicating the attenuation of the
beam by a "slice" of the patient. The actual CT data is held in sinogram space as a matrix
wherein each row represents a gantry position, a gantry angle, a ray angle or the like (a first sinogram dimension); each column represents a detector number, a detector distance,
a detector angle, a ray position, or the like (a second sinogram dimension). A third
sinogram dimension is commonly used with multi-row or volumetric detectors,
representing each detector row. The matrix of data obtained in a CT image can be
displayed as a sinogram 10 as shown in FIG. 1, or reconstructed into a two-dimensional
image 12, as shown in FIG. 2.
i some radiotherapy systems, a physician views the cancerous areas on a CT
image and determines the beam angles and intensities (identified with respect to the
tumor image) which will be used to treat the tumor. In an automated system, such as that disclosed in U.S. Patent No. 5,661,773, the disclosure of which is hereby incorporated by
reference, a computer program selects the beam angles and intensities after the physician
identifies the tumorous region and upper and lower dose limits for the treatment.
More specifically, planning CT images are used to create a three-dimensional (3-
D) treatment plan of a region of interest. This region of interest is broken down into units
called voxels, which are defined as volumetric pixels. Each voxel is then assigned a
particular radiation dose depending on what type of tissue or other matter it contains, e.g. cancerous tissue, healthy tissue, air, water, etc.
Normally, the planning CT image of a patient is acquired substantially before the
radiation treatment to allow time for the treatment plan to be prepared. However, the
position of organs or other tissue to be treated can change from day-to-day because of a variety of factors. Further, patients move during treatment because of breathing, muscle
twitching, or the like, and many patients are larger than the field-of-view (FON) of the online CT imaging system. Uncertainty in the positioning of the patient with respect to
the planning CT image can undermine the conformality of the radiation delivery.
Thus, it is highly preferable to verify the treatment plan based on data obtained just prior to the time of treatment. This verification process can be done by techniques
that compare the planning image to an image of the patient at the time of treatment.
Acquisition of an online tomographic image for the latter provides the benefits of 3-D
tomographic imaging without requiring that the patient move between the imaging and treatment steps.
Unfortunately, the imaging data sets obtained on the day of treatment to be used
for preparing the patient model are often incomplete or limited. These limitations may be
caused by limited FONs set by the field size of the multi-leaf collimator (MLC) attached to the linear accelerator and the detector size of the radiotherapy system. The limitations
may also be caused by patients that are too large to fit within the FON of the CT imaging system associated with the radiotherapy equipment applying the radiation dose, yielding a
LFON image as shown in FIG. 3, which shows only a portion of the image shown in FIG. 2. The FON or image data sets may also be intentionally limited by modulated treatment
data or region-of-interest tomography (ROIT) involving reconstruction of treatment data, intentionally only delivered to a specific region(s). For example, in FIG. 3, not only is there a LFON, but the data around the edges contains significant artifacts so that the image has an irregular border and internal values that are distorted.
As mentioned above, the LFON of radiotherapy images creates problems of impaired visibility and degraded dose calculations. The most common reasons for impaired visibility are the limited field size of the MLC attached to the linear accelerator and the limited detector size. These limitations prevent the CT imaging system from collecting complete FON data for all sizes of patients at all sites. The problem of degraded dose calculations is caused by distorted electron densities and the loss of peripheral information for attenuation and scatter from the LFON images. This distortion of image values and loss of peripheral information can likewise affect other applications that utilize these images.
To resolve the problem of limited imaging data sets in which only a portion of an image is obtained, several scans of the patient may be made at various detector or patient positions, and then combined into a complete set. This has been done by adding together sinogram data, but requires that the imaging apparatus or patient position can be reliably modified accordingly. This is often not possible. Further, the problem of artifacts is still present due to the significant degree of mismatch between such data sets, while the additional handling of the patient is more costly, time intensive and can be difficult for
frail patients. Moreover, patients receiving multiple scans receive higher doses of
radiation than with a single scan.
Reconstruction of incomplete imaging data sets using available techniques results
in images that do not show the complete extent of the patient's body, can have artifacts
and incorrect voxel values, and thus, limit the extent to which the images can be used for applications including delivery verification, dose reconstruction, patient set-up,
contouring, deformable patient registration and deformable dose registration.
Accordingly, a need exists for methods that can solve problems caused by limited
imaging data sets.
Summary of the Invention
The present invention relates to methods by which an incomplete CT patient data
set can be combined with an existing CT patient data set to create an image of a patient
that is complete and with fewer artifacts. The present invention provides methods for utilizing complete planning CT data for reconstruction of incomplete CT data with
particular regard for a patient's daily anatomical variations. The complete planning CT
data is used as prior information to estimate the missing data for improving and reconstructing incomplete CT patient data.
In a first embodiment of the present invention, the method includes the steps of
obtaining first and second sinogram data sets or images from a patient. Both data sets are
converted to images, and aligned together so that statistically, there is optimal registration
between the two images. The aligned or "fused" image is reprojected as a sinogram.
This reprojected sinogram is compared to either the first or second sinogram to determine what data exists beyond the scope of the first or second sinogram. This additional data is added to the sinogram to which the reprojected sinogram was compared to obtain an augmented sinogram The augmented sinogram is then converted or reconstructed to an image, referred to as a fusion-aligned reprojection (FAR) image.
The method of the first embodiment of the present invention is advantageous in that the availability of only one limited data sinogram/image will not affect the ability to perform accurate delivery verification, dose reconstruction, patient setup or the like. The previously taken complete image or "second image" is fused, or aligned, to the limited data image or "first image." The sinogram representing the fused image is compared to the limited data sinogram, and the augmented limited data sinogram is prepared therefrom. From the augmented limited data sinogram the FAR image is obtained. The FAR image is used to accurately apply radiation to the treatment area, which may be positioned differently or contain anatomical changes as compared to the previously obtained complete image.
FAR compensates for limited data radiotherapy images by enhancing the conspicuity of structures in treatment images, improving electron density values, and estimating a complete representation of the patient. FAR combines the LFOV data with prior information about the patient including CT images used for planning the radiotherapy. The method of the first embodiment includes aligning or "fusing" the LFON image and the planning image, converting the images into "sinogram space",
merging the images in sinogram space, and reconstructing the images from sinograms into normal images. A key step of the FAR method is "fusion" or alignment of the planning image with the LFON image. However, if a patient's treatment position is close to the planning position, explicit fusion under the FAR method may not be necessary. Instead, an implicit fusion may be adequate if the normal setup error is sufficiently small.
Under these circumstances when this implementation of FAR is not viable or necessary, it is possible to replace the explicit fusion of FAR with an implicit fusion, referred to as normal-error-aligned reprojection (NEAR). NEAR, another embodiment of the present invention, is a variation of FAR for situations where explicit fusion is not possible or does not yield good results. Specifically, NEAR is accomplished when the images are already sufficiently aligned, as often results from using common radiotherapy patient setup protocols. The patient is often positioned within a few millimeters and a few degrees of the intended position, creating a normal setup error which constitutes the implicit fusion of NEAR.
A benefit of NEAR is that it may enable an iterative (two or more) variation of
FAR (NEAR2FAR). It is possible to iterate these methods using multiple applications of FAR, or going from NEAR to FAR (NEAR2FAR) for a two-iteration process. NEAR can be followed by FAR iterations, or FAR can be tried multiple times with different registration results. After creating a NEAR image, the quantitatively improved voxel values in the FON might enable an explicit fusion with the planning image, and a FAR image could be generated. NEAR and NEAR2FAR may be particularly beneficial when a
LFON causes severe quantitative and qualitative degradation of the images, whether because of a large patient, a small detector or MLC, or because a ROIT strategy is being
pursued. NEAR may also be quicker than FAR, as no time is required to do an explicit
fusion.
NEAR, FAR, and NEAR2FAR utilize planning CT data or other images as
imperfect prior information to reduce artifacts and quantitatively improve images. These
benefits can also increase the accuracy of dose calculations and be used for augmenting
CT images (e.g. megavoltage CT) acquired at different energies than planning CT images.
FAR, NEAR and NEAR2FAR may also be used for multi-modality imaging
(combining CT images with MRI images, etc.). While an MRI image may have different
image values, they may be correctable, or they may show the patient boundary, which
might be enough.
The methods of the present invention improve the data by aligning the LFON and
planning images, and merging the data sets in sinogram space, or vice versa. One
alignment option is explicit fusion, for producing FAR images. For cases where explicit
fusion is not viable, FAR can be implemented using the implicit fusion of NEAR. The
optional iterative use of NEAR and/or FAR is also possible, as are applications of NEAR and FAR to dose calculations and the compensation of LFON online megavoltage CT
images with kilovoltage CT planning images as mentioned above.
Various other features, objects, and advantages of the invention will be made
apparent to those skilled in the art from the following detailed description, claims, and
accompanying drawings.
Brief Description of the Drawings FIG. 1 an example of a sinogram obtained from the CT image of a patient;
FIG. 2 is an example of a planning image of a patient obtained from a sinogram
similar to that shown in FIG. 1;
FIG. 3 is an example of a LFON treatment image of a patient;
FIG. 4 is a flow diagram showing the steps involved in creating a FAR treatment image in accordance with a first embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 5 is a schematic representation of a full image scan of a patient;
FIG. 6 is a schematic representation of FIG. 5 with illustrative "anatomical"
changes and a different alignment, a limited image portion is shown in the center, and the
remaining portion, which was not fully scanned, is shown in phantom;
FIG. 7 demonstrates how the full image of FIG. 5 is aligned to the limited image
of FIG. 6 as used to achieve the resulting FAR image;
FIG. 8 is a schematic representation of a FAR image;
FIG. 9 is a schematic representation of a full image corresponding to the image of
FIG. 6; FIG. 10 shows a schematic representation of the actual alignment or "fusion" of
the images of FIGS. 5 and 6;
FIG. 11 is a reconstructed FAR image of FIGS. 2 and 3 aligned in accordance
with the method of the present invention; >
FIG. 12 shows a comparison of a planning image, a LFON treatment image, an
ideal treatment image, and a FAR treatment image; FIG. 13 shows an example FAR sinogram obtained by merging a LFON online
sinogram and an aligned planning CT sinogram;
FIG. 14 shows a comparison of radiotherapy dose calculations for a LFON image
and a FAR image;
FIG. 15 A is a flow diagram showing the steps involved in creating an aligned
reprojection image in accordance with the present invention;
FIG. 15B is a flow diagram showing the steps involved in creating an aligned
reprojection image in accordance with a different embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 15C is a flow diagram showing the steps involved in creating an aligned
reprojection image in accordance with another different embodiment of the present
invention;
FIG. 16 shows examples of LFON images, NEAR images, and FAR images for
field-of-view sizes of 38.6, 29.3, and 19.9 cm based upon the online image;
FIG. 17 shows a LFON reconstruction for a 10.5 cm FON, a NEAR
reconstruction, and a two iteration NEAR2FAR reconstruction; FIG. 18 shows a comparison of radiotherapy dose calculations for complete FON
online images and a LFON image, a NEAR image, and a NEAR2FAR image, for rectal points, bladder points, and prostate points; and
FIG. 19 shows canine CT images from a kilo voltage CT scanner, a megavoltage
CT scanner, a LFON version of the megavoltage image, and a FAR reconstruction from
the LFOV data augmented with planning CT data.
Detailed Description of the Invention Referring now to the drawings, FIG. 1 is an example of a sinogram 10 obtained
from the CT image of a patient. FIG. 2 is an example of a planning CT image obtained
from a sinogram similar to that shown in FIG. 1, and FIG. 3 is an example of a LFOV
image from an online CT scan of the patient just prior to radiotherapy treatment.
A preferred method in accordance with a first embodiment of the present
invention is shown in the flow diagram of FIG. 4. FIG. 4 represents the first embodiment
process involved in creating a fusion-aligned reprojection (FAR) image from a limited
data image and a complete planning image. The process begins by obtaining a limited data sinogram 50 typically representing the treatment area from a patient. The limited data sinogram 50 is preferably obtained near the time that the patient is receiving his or
her radiation treatment, but may be obtained at any time. The limited data sinogram 50 is
reconstructed to a limited data image 52, as seen in the examples of FIGS. 1 and 3, and
represented schematically in FIG. 6 as limited object 156. FIG. 3 contains a significant
amount of artifacts such as a white irregular border 53 around the image along with some
image distortion of image values. By way of example, the treatment area targeted in FIG.
3 is of a prostate. However, the methods of the present invention can be applied to
images of any part of the body, or be used in other applications, such as veterinary
medicine or extended to industrial uses.
A complete planning image 54 of the same patient and same treatment area, as
shown by way of example in FIG. 2 as image 12, and represented schematically in FIG. 5 as object 154, is typically obtained prior to obtaining the limited data image 52, image 14
of FIG. 3, for the purpose of treatment planning. Even if limited data image 52, image 14
of FIG. 3, were taken only minutes after the complete planning image 54, image 12 of
FIG. 2, there are often inherent differences between the location of certain organs and/or tissue due to motion caused by normal bodily functions as the patient travels from the
plaiming CT system to the treatment system and is setup again. Additionally, if enough
time has elapsed between images, weight loss or growth of certain tissue can also occur.
Internal organ motion also causes some degradation relative to planned dose distribution.
It is noted that complete planning image 54, image 12 of FIG. 2, or limited data
image 52, image 14 of FIG. 3, need not be from a CT scanner or imager, and that this
technique can be generally applied to matching images from different projection imaging
or multi-modality imaging, such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission
tomography (PET), or single photon emission tomography (SPECT). Where different
imaging types are used, there may be misalignment or disagreement between images
values due to the differing methods of data collection. In addition, cross-energy
compensation of LFOV online megavoltage CT images with kilo voltage CT planning
images is also contemplated in the various embodiments of the present invention.
The two images 12 and 14 shown in FIGS. 2 and 3 and represented schematically
in FIGS. 5 and 6 by objects 154 and 156, have differences between them. In the actual
image examples of FIGS. 2 and 3, intestinal gas 16 is shown in FIG. 3, thereby displacing
the treatment target. In the schematic example of FIGS. 5 and 6, object 154 is composed of diagonals 158a and 160a and an inclusion 161a, within a frame 162a. Limited object
156 shows only corresponding diagonals 160b and 158b, and part of the inclusion
designated as 161b. Thus, there is a change between diagonal 158a and 158b and only
partial data for inclusion 161b.
As shown in FIG. 4, "fusion" or image registration techniques are used to align
limited data image 52 and complete image 54. In the schematic example in FIG. 7,
limited object 156 is fused with complete object 154 so that statistically, there is optimal
registration between the objects 154 and 156. FIG. 7 shows how the orientation of object
154 is aligned to closely match that of object 156. FIG. 10 shows diagonal 160c as the
perfect registration between diagonals 160a and 160b. There is less than perfect
registration between diagonals 158a and 158b. Both lines are superimposed only by way
of example to show that fusion is not perfect as evidenced by the double edge 163. To
the contrary, a theoretically perfect fusion may not exist in the context of anatomical changes, and is not a requirement for these methods.
FAR is not specific to the registration technique. It could be through automatic,
manual, or hybrid methods that are known in the art. Image registration or fusion may be
achieved by several techniques. One such technique is known as mutual information
(MI), for which a well-known algorithm has been developed. One such example of this
algorithm being used to register multi-modal images is described in the following
publication, incorporated herein by reference: Frederik Maes, Andre Collignon, Dirk
Vendermeulen, Guy Marchal, and Paul Suetens, Multimodality Image Registration by
Maximization of Mutual Information, Vol. 16, No. 2, IEEE Transactions on Medical
Imaging, 187 (April 1997).
Extracted Feature Fusion (EFF) is another registration technique providing numerous advantages over prior art techniques. EFF is a voxel-based image registration
method, wherein only extracted features of images are registered or fused. For example, a patient's bone structure usually stays the same even when a patient loses a substantial
amount of weight. Therefore, the bones can in effect be extracted from each image
subject to alignment, and then registered using statistical methods. In the simple example of FIG. 5, diagonal 160a and frame 162 may represent bone or tissue that remains
relatively unchanged over time. Therefore, only these relatively static features might be
selected for fusion, while other features that are more dynamic, perhaps diagonals 158a,
158b and inclusion 161a, 161b, need not be included in the registration calculations.
The benefits of registering only an extracted portion of an image are reduced
calculation times, improved accuracy, and more clearly defined goals for alignment in cases where the patient has significantly changed in shape. The speed benefits arise from
the registration of fewer data points, which in this case are voxels. The total processing
time is generally proportional to the number of points selected, so reducing that number
from the size of the entire three-dimensional image set to a subset of points meeting
certain criteria (e.g. voxels that represent bone or do not represent air) will typically
reduce calculation times. This reduction of voxels can provide more accurate results than
other methods of reducing the number of voxels for MI techniques, such as regular down-
sampling.
Other image registration techniques include manual fusion, alignment using
geometric features (e.g., surfaces), gradient methods, and voxel-similarity techniques.
Sinogram-based registration techniques could also be applied.
Any useful LFON registration for FAR, whether automatic, manual or hybrid,
implies that there is some information in those images in spite of any quantitative and
qualitative degradation. In these cases, the goal of FAR is to quantitatively and
qualitatively improve upon the information present by incorporating additional prior
information. Yet, as FOV's become more severely reduced, images may lose their utility
for automatic fusion, manual fusion and visual inspection. There are also a number of
other reasons why automatic fusion may not provide the desired result, such as finding a
local minimum. Another problem with fusion is that in the presence of anatomical changes there may not be an unambiguous correct alignment, as some structures may
align well at the expense of others, as demonstrated in FIG. 10. h these cases, NEAR, iterative application, and testing multiple registrations provide additional opportunities.
Referring again to FIG. 4, the aligned or transformed complete image 56 is
reprojected as a sinogram 58. The data for sinogram 58 is once again in a matrix wherein
each row represents an angle, and each column represents a distance. The data matrix of
the reprojected sinogram 58 is compared to the data matrix for limited data sinogram 50
to determine what data is missing from the limited data sinogram 50. This is now
possible because the reprojected sinogram of the transformed complete image 58 is in
alignment with the limited data sinogram 50.
The approximation of the missing sinogram data from the reprojected sinogram of
transformed complete image 58 is added to the limited data sinogram 50 to create an
augmented limited data sinogram 60. The augmented limited data sinogram 60 is reconstructed to a FAR image 62 that is an approximation of what the complete image
would have looked like at the time the limited data image 52 was obtained. The FAR
image 62 is represented schematically in FIG. 8. Frame 162a is the same as in FIG. 5,
and diagonals 158c, 160c and inclusion 161c are now complete. This can compared to
the object 168 in FIG. 9, which represents the image that would have been taken at the time of treatment if it were possible to obtain a complete image. The fact that the outer
regions 170 of diagonal 158d are not the same as diagonal 158c is not critical to the
invention.
FIG. 11 represents a reconstructed FAR image obtained by combining the
sinograms of the LFOV and the complete planning images shown in FIGS. 2 and 3 in
accordance with the method of a first embodiment of the present invention. It can be seen
that slight artifacts such as the faint ring 180 as shown in FIG. 11 can still result from this method. However, such artifacts are insignificant because they do not impair the
conspicuity of the important structures in the FOV, nor are they noticeably detrimental to
dose calculations or other processes that utilize these images.
The reconstructed FAR image obtained from the method of the first embodiment
of the present invention can then be used for patient setup (positioning the patient prior to
delivery), contouring (identifying target regions and sensitive structures, either
automatically, manually, or with a template-based approach), dose registration (changing
delivery patterns to compensate for patient position and/or tumor changes), delivery
verification (using a signal measured at an exit detector to compute energy fluence
directed toward a patient), deformable patient registration and deformable dose
registration (using anatomical, biomechanical and region of interest data to map changes
in the patient's anatomy between each fraction, a reconstructed dose is mapped to a
reference image to obtain a cumulative dose).
FIG. 12 shows the comparison of a planning image 12', which is equivalent to the
planning CT image 12 of FIG. 2, a LFOV treatment image 14', which is equivalent to the
LFOV image 14 of FIG. 3, an ideal treatment image 20, and a FAR treatment image 18',
which is equivalent to the FAR image 18 of FIG. 11. It should be noted that the FAR
treatment image 18 and 18' is substantially similar to the ideal treatment image 20, except for the slight artifact rings 180 and 180' that do not impair the conspicuity of the
important structures in the FOV, nor are they noticeably detrimental to dose calculations.
The completion process of FIG. 4 can be seen in sinogram space in FIG. 13. FIG.
13 shows an example FAR sinogram 26 obtained by merging a LFOV sinogram 22 with
an aligned planning sinogram 24. The truncated limited data sinogram 22 is shown in
FIG. 13 A. The missing data from the LFOV sinogram 22 is estimated from the aligned
planning sinogram 24 shown in FIG. 13B. The resulting FAR sinogram 26 shown in FIG. 13C estimates the missing data from the aligned planning sinogram 24 of FIG. 13B.
FIG. 14 shows a comparison of radiotherapy dose calculations for a LFOV image
28 and a FAR image 30. The LFOV image 28 results in substantial dose calculation
errors, while the FAR image 30 yields near perfect dose calculations. The LFOV dose
volume histogram 28 (DVH) shows both overestimation and underestimation between the
calculated and delivered doses, while the FAR DVH 30 shows that the doses calculated
and delivered for the FAR image are near perfect. The DVHs calculated with FAR
images are virtually identical to those for the complete images.
FIGS. 15A, 15B, and 15C represent different embodiments of methods involved in creating an aligned-reprojection image from a limited data image or sinogram and a
complete planning image or sinogram. Referring first to FIG. 15 A, a FAR, NEAR, or
NEAR2FAR image is created by obtaining a limited data sinogram 32 A representing the
treatment area from a patient. The limited data sinogram is reconstructed to a limited
data image 34A. A complete planning image 36A of the same patient is typically
obtained prior to obtaining the limited data image 34A. Image fusion or image
registration techniques are used to align the complete planning image 36A with the
limited data image 34 A. The aligned complete planning image 38 A is reprojected as a sinogram 40A. The reprojected sinogram of the aligned planning image 40A is compared
to the limited data sinogram 32A. The missing sinogram data from the reprojected sinogram 40A is added or merged with the limited data sinogram 32A to create an augmented limited data sinogram 42A. The augmented limited data sinogram 42A is
reconstructed to an aligned-reprojection image 44A that is an approximation of what the complete image would have looked like at the time the limited data image was obtained.
The aligned-reprojection image may be fed back to the limited data image 34A for a
multiple iteration method to possibly achieve better results. The above method is flexible
with regard to which image (e.g., complete FOV planning image or limited online FOV
image) is realigned to the other and reprojected. What matters is that the complete
planning image is used to estimate the missing data from the limited data image. For
example, the complete planning image could be realigned to the LFOV image creating an aligned planning image, reproject the aligned planning image to a sinogram, augment or
merge the LFOV sinogram with the aligned planning sinogram to yield an augmented LFOV sinogram, and reconstruct the augmented LFOV sinogram to an aligned-
reprojection image as shown in FIG. 15 A. Or alternatively, the LFOV image could be realigned to the complete planning image creating an aligned LFOV image, reproject the
aligned LFOV image to a sinogram, augment that sinogram with the complete planning sinogram to yield an augmented LFOV sinogram, and reconstruct the augmented LFOV
sinogram to an aligned-reprojection image.
The method of realigning the image and reprojecting it into a sinogram can be mathematically streamlined as shown in FIGS. 15B and 15C. Generally, the relative alignment between the complete planning image and the limited data image is
determined. Then, instead of realigning the complete planning image to the limited data
image and reprojecting the aligned planning image to a sinogram, one can realign the complete planning sinogram to the limited data sinogram (or vice versa), which is an
alternate, but equivalent, method of achieving the same result; a realigned sinogram of the
planning image. The aligned planning sinogram is then used to estimate the missing data
from the limited data sinogram which is augmented into the limited data sinogram. The
augmented limited data sinogram is then reconstructed to create an aligned-reprojection
image.
This alternate embodiment allows an estimate of the missing data from a limited
data sinogram with an aligned complete planning sinogram. It does not matter
conceptually how the sinogram is realigned, whether an image is realigned and reprojected or if the sinogram is realigned directly.
FIG. 15B illustrates another embodiment of a method for creating an aligned-
reprojection image from a limited data sinogram or image and a complete planning image
or sinogram. The inputs to the process are a complete planning image 36B or complete
planning sinogram 108B and a LFOV sinogram 32B. The LFOV sinogram 32B is
initially reconstructed into a LFOV image 34B and then fused (explicit (FAR) or implicit
(NEAR)) with the complete planning image 36B. The complete planning image 36B is
reprojected to a sinogram or the original planning sinogram 108B is transformed with the
fusion result to yield an aligned planning image 40B. The sinogram data of the aligned planning image 40B is used to estimate the data missing from the LFOV sinogram 32B.
The limited data sinogram 32B is merged with the aligned planning image sinogram 40B, resulting in an augmented limited data sinogram 42B. This augmented limited data sinogram 42B is reconstructed into an aligned-reprojection image 44B. The aligned- reprojection image may supersede the original limited data image 34B for a multiple iteration process (NEAR2FAR).
FIG. 15C illustrates yet another embodiment of the present invention for creating an aligned-reprojection image from a limited data sinogram and a complete planning image or sinogram. The inputs to the process are a limited data sinogram 32C and either an optional complete planning image 36C or most preferably a complete planning sinogram 108C. If the process starts with a complete planning image 36C as one of the inputs, then that image is reprojected to sinogram space to yield a complete planning sinogram 108C. The limited sinogram 32C is fused in sinogram space (explicit (FAR) or implicit (NEAR)) with the complete planning sinogram 108C. The next step involves realigning the complete planning sinogram 108C, or realigning and reprojecting the complete planning image 36C using the same fusion result. The resulting aligned plaiming image sinogram 40C is merged with the limited data sinogram 32C to create an augmented limited data sinogram 42C. The augmented limited data sinogram 42C is then reconstructed into an aligned-reprojection image 44B.
To summarize the differences between the alternate embodiment methods of FIG. 15C, the fusions are performed in sinogram-space as the limited data sinogram 32C is fused (implicit or explicit) to the complete data sinogram 108C, unlike the embodiments
of FIGS. 15A and 15B that use image fusion. Based upon the sinogram fusion, the realigned planning sinogram 40C can be created by realigning sinogram 108C, or by realigning planning image 36C and reprojecting into sinogram space. The process is then the same for each case. The aligned planning sinogram 40C is merged with the limited data sinogram 32C to create an augmented limited data sinogram 42C. The augmented limited data sinogram 42C is then reconstructed into an aligned-reprojection image 44B.
FIG. 16 shows representative images from a planning CT image 66 and the corresponding online image 64. The contours 65 for the planning images are shown in black, while the contours 67 for the online images are shown in white. Three different LFOV images 68, 70, 72, NEAR images 74, 76, 78, and FAR images 80, 82, 84 for field- of-view sizes of 38.6, 29.3, and 19.9 cm are shown based upon the online image 64. As the FOV decreases, the artifacts become more severe in the LFOV images 68, 70, 72, while the NEAR 74, 76, 78 and FAR images 80, 82, 84 are less affected. These images are representative of how NEAR and FAR can utilize available information to qualitatively improve the reconstructions for a range of FOV sizes. In this particular case, there is little visual difference between the NEAR and FAR images. The similarity of NEAR and FAR images can occur for several reasons. Where the normal setup error is small, the explicit fusion will generally not improve much upon the normal error, or because the anatomical differences between the planning CT image 66 and the online image 64 are a more significant factor than the alignment between those images, there will also be little improvement.
NEAR and FAR can utilize available information to qualitatively improve the
reconstructions for a range of FOV sizes. The explicit and implicit fusion align the
planning data with the LFOV data. A LFOV online image augmented with NEAR or
FAR can produce images that are quantitatively closer to the complete FOV online image
than the planning image alone. NEAR and FAR create quantitative improvements and
artifact reductions, and also improve upon the accuracy of dose calculations. FAR may not be possible if the distortion of image values preclude a successful fusion. In this case,
a NEAR image is created, and by fusing or aligning the NEAR image to the planning CT
image, a NEAR2FAR image is generated, further reducing artifacts and improving
alignment. The results of an iterative application of NEAR and FAR are shown in FIG.
17.
FIG. 17 shows a LFOV reconstruction 86 for a 10.5 cm FOV, a NEAR
reconstruction 88, and a two iteration NEAR2FAR reconstruction 90. In this case, a FAR
reconstruction was not immediately possible because the distortion of image values precluded a successful fusion. A NEAR image was created, and by fusing the interior scan region to the planning CT image, a two iteration NEAR2FAR image could be
generated.
FIG. 18 shows a comparison of radiotherapy dose calculations for complete FOV
online images and a LFOV image 92, a NEAR image 94, and a NEAR2FAR image 96, for prostate points, bladder points, and rectal points. The DVH's (Dose Volume
Histogram) are based upon the known contours from the complete FOV online image.
The LFOV dose calculation overestimates the prostate dose by approximately 15%, and the rectum and bladder doses have areas of both overestimation and underestimation. The dose distributions calculated using NEAR and NEAR2FAR produce DVH's indistinguishable from the full FOV dose calculation.
FIG. 19 shows canine CT images from a kilovoltage CT scanner 98, a megavoltage CT scanner 100, a LFOV version of the megavoltage image 102, and a FAR reconstruction 104 from the LFOV data augmented with planning CT data. Of particular interest is that these data sets were not only acquired on different CT systems but at different energies, requiring that FAR combine megavoltage and kilovoltage data. The resulting FAR image 104 includes slight artifacts 106 that can result from this method. However, such artifacts 106 are insignificant because they do not impair the conspicuity of the important structures in the FOV, nor are they noticeably detrimental to dose calculations or other processes that utilize these images.
As discussed above, the methods of the present invention may be used for purposes beyond radiotherapy in cases where potentially imperfect prior information is available. While the present description has primarily disclosed use of prior information in the form of a planning CT, it is feasible to apply NEAR and FAR to multi-modality images, such as creating a FAR image by combining an online CT (megavoltage or kilovoltage) data set with a planning MRI image. In such cases, the MRI or other- modality image needs to be converted to values compatible with the LFOV data set. A complex mapping of values will provide the best results, but even using the alternate
modality image to describe the patient's outer contour and using a water-equivalency
assumption will provide benefits. This is particularly true considering the demonstrated
robustness of FAR with regard to anatomical changes, imperfect alignments, and even
systematic differences in reconstructed values between megavoltage and kilovoltage CT
images. As described above, FAR can also combine megavoltage and kilovoltage CT
data. In FIG. 19, FAR was used to augment megavoltage CT data sets with kilovoltage
plaiming CT data sets.
Other applications include using NEAR and FAR for dose calculations, iterative
application of NEAR and FAR for severely limited FOV's, FIG. 17, and using FAR for a
combination of kilovoltage and megavoltage CT images, FIG. 19. Dose calculations are typically based upon CT images and require reconstructed values that can be calibrated to
electron densities. The artifacts and quantitative distortions introduced by FOV
truncations may degrade this calibration, while the lack of peripheral information can
impair the scatter and attenuation calculations often performed when computing dose.
The methods described above for the present invention can be applied regardless
of the reason(s) the image data set is limited. This includes hardware constraints, such as
FOV's set by MLC size or detector size, etc. The methods may also be applied to
intentionally limited data sets or FOV's. An example of this is called region-of-interest tomography (ROIT), in which the scan FOV is intentionally limited to reduce patient dose, even though complete FOV data sets are available. A particular example would be
reconstruction of treatment data, intentionally only delivered to a specific region(s) of the
body. This delivery would constitute a partial CT sinogram, and FAR or NEAR could estimate the missing data. More generally, the limited data is not necessarily LFOV, but can also be more complex patterns of missing data, such as modulated treatment data. NEAR and FAR may also be extensible to other types of limited data situations, such as limited slice or limited-projection images.
While the invention has been described with reference to preferred embodiments, it is to be understood that the invention is not intended to be limited to the specific embodiments set forth above. It is recognized that those skilled in the art will appreciate that certain substitutions, alterations, modifications, and omissions may be made without departing from the spirit or intent of the invention. Accordingly, the foregoing description is meant to be exemplary only, the invention is to be taken as including all reasonable equivalents to the subject matter of the invention, and should not limit the scope of the invention set forth in the following claims.