Application of holographic display in radiotherapy treatment planning II: a multi-institutional study.
We hypothesized that use of a true 3D display providing easy visualization of patient anatomy and dose distribution would lead to the production of better quality radiation therapy treatment plans. We report on a randomized prospective multi-institutional study to evaluate a novel 3D display for treatment planning.The Perspecta Spatial 3D System produces 360 degrees holograms by projecting crosssectional images on a diffuser screen rotating at 900 rpm. Specially-developed software allows bi-directional transfer of image and dose data between Perspecta and the Pinnacle planning system.Thirty-three patients previously treated at three institutions were included in this IRB-approved study. Patient data were de-identified, randomized, and assigned to different planners. A physician at each institution reviewed the cases and established planning objectives. Two treatment plans were then produced for each patient, one based on the Pinnacle system alone and another in conjunction with Perspecta. Plan quality was then evaluated by the same physicians who established the planning objectives. All plans were viewable on both Perspecta and Pinnacle for review. Reviewing physicians were blinded to the planning device used. Data from a 13-patient pilot study were also included in the analysis.Perspecta plans were considered better in 28 patients (61%), Pinnacle in 14 patients (30%), and both were equivalent in 4 patients. The use of non-coplanar beams was more common with Perspecta plans (82% vs. 27%). The mean target dose differed by less than 2% between rival plans. Perspecta plans were somewhat more likely to have the hot spot located inside the target (43% vs. 33%). Conversely, 30% of the Pinnacle plans had the hot spot outside the target compared with 18% for Perspecta plans. About 57% of normal organs received less dose from Perspecta plans. No statistically significant association was found between plan preference and planning institution or planner.The study found that use of the holographic display leads to radiotherapy plans preferred in a majority of cases over those developed with 2D displays. These data indicate that continued development of this technology for clinical implementation is warranted.
Chu
James C H
JCH
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
Gong
Xing
X
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
Cai
Yang
Y
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
Kirk
Michael C
MC
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
Zusag
Thomas W
TW
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
Shott
Susan
S
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
Rivard
Mark J
MJ
Tufts-New-England Medical Center, Boston, MA.
Melhus
Christopher S
CS
Tufts-New-England Medical Center, Boston, MA.
Cardarelli
Gene A
GA
Rhode Island Hospital Brown Medial School, Providence, RI.
Hurley
Amanda
A
Rhode Island Hospital Brown Medial School, Providence, RI.
Hepel
Jaroslaw T
JT
Tufts-New-England Medical Center, Boston, MA.|Rhode Island Hospital Brown Medial School, Providence, RI.
Napoli
Josh
J
Actuality Medical, Inc., Bedford, MA.
Stutsman
Sandy
S
Actuality Medical, Inc., Bedford, MA.
Abrams
Ross A
RA
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
D006696:Holography / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D011880:Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted / Q000295:instrumentation / Q000379:methods*
Radiother Oncol. 2007 Feb;82(2):218-21
17224194
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2009 Jul 17;10(3):96-114
19692974