Abstract
Automated atlas-based segmentation (ABS) algorithms present the potential to reduce the variability in volume delineation. Several vendors offer software that are mainly used for cranial, head and neck, and prostate cases. The present study will compare the contours produced by a radiation oncologist to the contours computed by different automated ABS algorithms for prostate bed cases, including femoral heads, bladder, and rectum. Contour comparison was evaluated by different metrics such as volume ratio, Dice coefficient, and Hausdorff distance. Results depended on the volume of interest showed some discrepancies between the different software. Automatic contours could be a good starting point for the delineation of organs since efficient editing tools are provided by different vendors. It should become an important help in the next few years for organ at risk delineation.
Highlights
Prostate bed radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy may present some clinical benefits in term of clinical outcome [1, 2]
The comparison of five different automatic-based segmentation software used for prostate bed and nearby organs showed these algorithms were very efficient for high contrast organs such as femoral heads
Automatic contours were quite close to the expert contours, but corrections were required and for some cases, depending on the algorithm, computed contours were bad
Summary
Prostate bed radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy may present some clinical benefits in term of clinical outcome [1, 2]. Advances in radiation oncology led to intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and image-guided radiotherapy (IGRT). Those advances allow to either increase dose to target tissues or spare surrounding healthy structures. The development of state-of-the-art technologies including imaging modalities, treatment planning systems, and linacs have enabled radiotherapy treatments to be highly specific [4]. In this context, the delineation of target and normal organs is the prerequisite inputs to the planning process. The aim of the study was to compare the different atlas-based auto-segmentation software available when used for prostate bed and organs at risk. The study was limited to a single radiation oncologist to avoid inter-rater variations
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
