Original paper| Volume 31, ISSUE 3, P219-223, May 2015

Download started.


Validation of a deformable image registration produced by a commercial treatment planning system in head and neck

Published:February 05, 2015DOI:


      • We evaluate the accuracy of the RayStation TPS hybrid DIR algorithm in distances.
      • We validate the use of inverse consistence (IC) property.
      • We use IC property for studying the implication of the distances on the dose.
      • We show the differences in DVH due accuracy of hybrid DIR algorithm.


      In recent years one of the areas of interest in radiotherapy has been adaptive radiation therapy (ART), with the most efficient way of performing ART being the use of deformable image registration (DIR). In this paper we use the distances between points of interest (POIs) in the computed tomography (CT) and the cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) acquisition images and the inverse consistence (IC) property to validate the RayStation treatment planning system (TPS) DIR algorithm. This study was divided into two parts: Firstly the distance-accuracy of the TPS DIR algorithm was ascertained by placing POIs on anatomical features in the CT and CBCT images from five head and neck cancer patients. Secondly, a method was developed for studying the implication of these distances on the dose by using the IC. This method compared the dose received by the structures in the CT, and the structures that were quadruply-deformed. The accuracy of the TPS was 1.7 ± 0.8 mm, and the distance obtained with the quadruply-deformed IC method was 1.7 ± 0.9 mm, i.e. the difference between the IC method multiplied by two, and that of the TPS validation method, was negligible. Moreover, the IC method shows very little variation in the dose-volume histograms when comparing the original and quadruply-deformed structures. This indicates that this algorithm is useful for planning adaptive radiation treatments using CBCT in head and neck cancer patients, although these variations must be taken into account when making a clinical decision to adapt a treatment plan.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Physica Medica: European Journal of Medical Physics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Wang H.
        • Dong L.
        • Lii M.F.
        • Lee A.L.
        • Crevoisier R.D.
        • Mohan R.
        • et al.
        Implementation and validation of a three-dimensional deformable registration algorithm for targeted prostate cancer radiotherapy.
        Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005; 61: 725-735
        • Mencarelli A.
        • van Beek S.
        • van Kranen S.
        • Rasch C.
        • van Herk M.
        • Sonke J.J.
        Validation of deformable registration in head and neck cancer using analysis of variance.
        Med Phys. 2012; 39: 6879-6884
        • Huger S.
        • Graff P.
        • Harter V.
        • Marchesi V.
        • Royer P.
        • Diaz J.C.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of the block matching deformable registration algorithm in the field of head-and-neck adaptive radiotherapy.
        Phys Medica. 2014; 30: 301-308
        • Kirby N.
        • Chuang C.
        • Ueda U.
        • Pouliot J.
        The need for application-based adaptation of deformable image registration.
        Med Phys. 2013; 40 (011702–1-10)
        • Kashani R.
        • Hub M.
        • Kessler M.L.
        • Balter J.M.
        Technical note: a physical phantom for assessment of accuracy of deformable alignment algorithms.
        Med Phys. 2007; 34: 2785-2788
        • Yeo U.J.
        • Taylor M.L.
        • Supple J.R.
        • Smith R.L.
        • Dunn L.
        • Kron T.
        • et al.
        Is it sensible to “deform” dose? 3D experimental validation of dose-warping.
        Med Phys. 2012; 39: 5065-5072
        • Yeo U.J.
        • Taylor M.L.
        • Dunn L.
        • Kron T.
        • Smith R.L.
        • Franich R.D.
        A novel methodology for 3D deformable dosimetry.
        Med Phys. 2012; 39: 2203-2212
        • Varadhan R.
        • Karangelis G.
        • Krishnan K.
        • Hui S.
        A framework for deformable image registration validation in radiotherapy clinical applications.
        J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013; 14: 192-211
        • Zhong H.
        • Kim J.
        • Chetty J.
        Analysis of deformable image registration accuracy using computational modeling.
        Med Phys. 2010; 37: 970-979
        • Nie K.
        • Chuang C.
        • Kirby N.
        • Braunstein S.
        • Pouliot J.
        Site-specific deformable imaging registration algorithm selection using patient-based simulated deformation.
        Med Phys. 2013; 40 (041911–1-10)
        • Saleh-Sayah N.K.
        • Weiss E.
        • Salguero F.J.
        • Siebers J.F.
        A distance to dose difference tool for estimating the required/spatial accuracy of a displacement vector field.
        Med Phys. 2011; 38: 2318-2323
        • Yang D.
        • Li H.
        • Low D.A.
        • Deasy J.O.
        • Naqa I.E.
        A fast inverse consistent deformable image registration method based on symmetric optical flow computation.
        Phys Med Biol. 2008; 53: 6143-6165
        • Bender E.T.
        • Tomé W.A.
        The utilization of consistency metrics for error analysis in deformable image registration.
        Phys Med Biol. 2009; 54: 5561-5577
        • Yan C.
        • Zhong H.
        • Murphy M.
        • Weiss E.
        • Siebers J.V.
        A pseudoinverse deformation vector field generator and its applications.
        Med Phys. 2010; 37: 1117-1128
        • Seet K.Y.T.
        • Barghi A.
        • Yartsev S.
        • Van Dyk J.
        The effects of field-of-view and patient size on CT numbers from cone-beam computed tomography Phys.
        Med Biol. 2009; 54: 6251-6262