Improvement in male pelvis magnetic resonance image contouring following radiologist‐delivered training
Introduction The magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MRL) combines both magnetic resonance imaging and a linear accelerator, allowing for daily treatment adaptation. This study aimed to assess the impact of radiologist‐delivered training in magnetic resonance (MR) contouring of relevant structure...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of medical radiation sciences 2024-03, Vol.71 (1), p.114-122 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Introduction
The magnetic resonance linear accelerator (MRL) combines both magnetic resonance imaging and a linear accelerator, allowing for daily treatment adaptation. This study aimed to assess the impact of radiologist‐delivered training in magnetic resonance (MR) contouring of relevant structures within the male pelvis.
Methods
Two radiation oncologists, two radiation oncology registrars and seven radiation therapists completed contouring on 10 male pelvis MR datasets both pre‐ and post‐training. A 2‐hour MR anatomy training session was delivered by a radiologist, who also provided the ‘gold standard’ contours. The pre‐ and post‐training contours were compared against the gold standard with Dice similarity coefficient (DSC) and Hausdorff distances calculated; and the pre‐ and post‐confidence scores and timing were compared.
Results
The improvement in DSC were significant in prostate, rectum and seminal vesicles, with a post‐training median DSC of 0.87 ± 0.06, 0.92 ± 0.04 and 0.80 ± 0.14, respectively. The median Hausdorff improved with a median of 1.46 ± 0.78 mm, 0.52 ± 0.32 mm and 1.11 ± 0.86 mm for prostate, rectum and seminal vesicles, respectively. Bladder concordance was high both pre‐ and post‐training. Urethra contours improved post‐training, however, remained difficult to contour with a median post‐DSC of 0.51 ± 0.24. Overall, confidence scoring improved (P |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2051-3895 2051-3909 |
DOI: | 10.1002/jmrs.727 |