Research Article

Evaluation of Deformable Image Registration Methods for Dose Monitoring in Head and Neck Radiotherapy

Table 3

Average cumulated dose (Gy) error by landmarks and by registration methods with the first observer as anatomical reference.

Landmark dose (Gy)
BonesSoft tissuesPrecision (AVG)Accuracy (AVG SD)
1234567891011121314

Planned dose44.4735.1354.8764.9163.648.8444.5064.7421.6066.8766.9163.9539.7141.3748.6810.35
Cumulated dose difference*1.951.961.681.961.713.092.872.552.521.930.691.125.174.252.392.40

Landmark Cumulated Dose Error (Gy)
Interobserver variability0.410.230.290.380.670.260.280.310.410.770.140.611.683.140.680.75
FFD MI filtered CTs0.360.600.430.580.690.430.410.590.630.740.910.482.632.410.850.93
Demons MI filtered CTs0.400.390.600.570.710.330.450.411.090.750.690.782.742.460.880.95
Demons MI0.330.390.570.540.690.380.480.471.110.900.730.802.562.330.880.92
Demons MSE0.410.520.420.480.880.400.430.560.851.380.740.753.152.960.991.22
FFD MSE filtered CTs0.490.690.520.590.860.550.380.830.950.830.980.572.373.090.981.09
FFD MI0.310.630.470.530.530.480.610.821.090.840.850.852.452.680.941.02
Demons MSE filtered CTs0.410.520.420.480.880.400.430.560.851.380.740.753.152.960.991.25
FFD MSE0.341.161.131.271.020.450.921.341.881.261.061.862.753.911.451.60
Demons D. maps0.991.293.111.191.240.530.941.281.762.391.292.223.055.141.892.14
FFD D. maps0.951.561.240.941.530.531.001.542.662.901.322.542.994.871.902.18
Rigid MSE0.941.671.202.781.800.591.021.713.353.991.352.613.444.272.192.60

AVG: average, AVG SD: average standard deviation, FFD: free form deformation, MSE: mean squared error, MI: mutual information, and CT: computed tomography (scan).
Methods are classified by their performance order. The performance is defined by the accuracy (average of the cumulated dose error) and the precision (average of the standard deviation cumulated dose error). The cumulated dose difference (*) represents the reference difference between planned and cumulated doses from the first observer. A second observer allows quantifying the interobserver variability.
The “FFD with MI on filtered CTs” errors are inferior to all the methods errors ( < 0.03), except for the “demons with MI on filtered CTs” and “demons with MI on original CTs” methods and for the “demons with MSE on original CTs” ( = 0.06). The “demons with MI on filtered CTs” errors are inferior to the “delineation maps based method” errors, the “demons with MSE on filtered CTs” errors, and the “FFD MSE on original CTs” errors (respectively, < 0.01, ≤ 0.03 and < 0.01).