Combined PET/CT for IMRT treatment planning of NSCLC: Contrast-enhanced CT images for Monte Carlo dose calculation

The effect of contrast agent on dose distribution in treatment planning radiotherapy: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

One method of increasing the quality of CT images is the use of contrast agents. The evidence underscores the clinical importance of using contrast-enhanced imaging in the treatment planning process and highlights the potential to improve patient care and treatment effectiveness. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the quantitative changes caused by contrast agents used in CT simulator images for photon dosimetry in radiotherapy treatment planning.

METHOD

The selected databases were Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Google Scholar. The search string was applied in the title, abstract, and keywords fields across the three international databases. The search terms included: contrast agent, dose distribution, dose difference, treatment planning system, treatment planning, radiotherapy, and Iodine contrast. The articles search was conducted between July and August 2024. The identified articles were evaluated for methodological quality using the Joanna Briggs Checklist.

RESULTS

A total of 399 records, after removing duplicate records (n=153), studies were screened by title and abstract to assess eligibility. After removing unrelated studies, 25 articles were included. A systematic review study showed that the difference in dose between the use of contrast agents and without contrast agents was 2% or less than 2%. Only three studies with 36 patients showed the dose differences were more than 2%.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review concluded that the use of contrast agents in radiotherapy at different sites and with different techniques does not significantly affect the extent of dose distribution changes, and this small difference is clinically acceptable.

Dosimetric effects of oral contrast in the planning of conventional radiotherapy and IMRT, for rectal cancer treatment

Introduction:

Contrast media are frequently used during radiation therapy simulation. However, there are concerns about dosimetric variations when dose calculation is done on contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT). This study evaluates the dosimetric effect of oral contrast during three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) and volumetric modulated arc radiotherapy (VMAT) planning.

Methods:

Rectal cancer patients were consecutively enrolled. For each patient, one unenhanced CT and one contrast-enhanced CT were taken using oral and intravenous contrast. Then, a 3D-CRT plan and an Intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT)/VMAT plan were generated in the enhanced CT, and the dose distribution was recalculated in the respective unenhanced CT. The beam intensities were kept the same as for the enhanced CT plans. Finally, the unenhanced and enhanced plans were compared by calculating the gamma index.

Results:

For 3D-CRT plans, there were statistically significant differences in second phase planning target volume (PTV) D2% (Mean difference (MD) between unenhanced and enhanced CT 0·01 Gy, 95% CI [0·003 to 0·02 Gy]) and in maximum doses to the bladder (MD 0·26 Gy, 95% CI [0·05 to 0·47 Gy]). For IMRT/VMAT plans, there were statistically significant differences in small intestine V45 Gy (MD 3·1 cc, 95% CI [0·81 to 5·4 cc]), bladder V45 Gy (MD 2·9%, 95% CI [1·4 to 4·3%]) and maximum dose to the bladder (MD 0·65 Gy, 95% CI [0·46 Gy to 0·85 Gy]). In addition, for PTV D98% the MD between unenhanced and enhanced CT was 0·22 Gy 95% CI [0·05 to 0·39].

Conclusions:

For most of the dose metrics, the differences were not clinically meaningful. The greatest differences were found in VMAT plans, especially in V45 Gy of the small intestine. This difference could lead to an underestimation of dose–volume metrics when the plan is based on an enhanced CT. The use of small bowel oral contrast does not significantly influence dose calculations and may not affect the acceptability of plans when adhering to constraints.

Oral contrast agents lead to underestimation of dose calculation in volumetric-modulated arc therapy planning for pelvic irradiation

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text

Background

The effects of oral contrast agents (OCAs) on dosimetry have not been studied in detail. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the influence of OCAs on dose calculation in volumetric-modulated arc therapy plans for rectal cancer.

Methods

From 2008 to 2016, computed tomography (CT) images were obtained from 33 rectal cancer patients administered OCA with or without intravenous contrast agent (ICA) and 14 patients who received no contrast agent. CT numbers of organs at risk were recorded and converted to electronic densities. Volumetric-modulated arc therapy plans were designed before and after the original densities were replaced with non-enhanced densities. Doses to the planned target volume (PTV) and organs at risk were compared between the plans.

Results

OCA significantly increased the mean and maximum densities of the bowels, while the effects of ICA on these parameters depended on the blood supply of the organs. With OCA, the actual doses for PTV were significantly higher than planned and doses to the bowel increased significantly although moderately. However, the increase in the volume receiving a high-range doses was substantial (the absolute change of intestine volume receiving ≥52 Gy: 1.46 [0.05−3.99, cubic centimeter range: −6.74 to 128.12], the absolute change of colon volume receiving ≥50 Gy: 0.34 [0.01−1.53 cc, range: −0.08 to 3.80 cc]. Dose changes due to ICA were insignificant. Pearson correlation showed that dose changes were significantly correlated with a high intestinal volume within or near the PTV (ρ > 0.5, P < 0.05) and with the density of enhanced intestine (ρ > 0.3, P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Contrast agents applied in simulation cause underestimation of doses in actual treatment. The overdose due to ICA was slight, while that due to OCA was moderate. The bowel volume receiving ≥50Gy was dramatically increased when OCA within the bowel was absent. Physicians should be aware of these issues if the original plan is barely within clinical tolerance or if a considerable volume of enhanced intestine is within or near the PTV.

DOSIMETRIC CONSEQUENCES OF USING CONTRAST-ENHANCED COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC IMAGES FOR INTENSITY-MODULATED STEREOTACTIC BODY RADIOTHERAPY PLANNING

Potential benefits of planning radiation therapy on a contrast-enhanced computed tomography scan (ceCT) should be weighed against the possibility that this practice may be associated with an inadvertent risk of overdosing nearby normal tissues. This study investigated the influence of ceCT on intensity-modulated stereotactic body radiotherapy (IM-SBRT) planning. Dogs with head and neck, pelvic, or appendicular tumors were included in this retrospective cross-sectional study. All IM-SBRT plans were constructed on a pre- or ceCT. Contours for tumor and organs at risk (OAR) were manually constructed and copied onto both CT's; IM-SBRT plans were calculated on each CT in a manner that resulted in equal radiation fluence. The maximum and mean doses for OAR, and minimum, maximum, and mean doses for targets were compared. Data were collected from 40 dogs per anatomic site (head and neck, pelvis, and limbs). The average dose difference between minimum, maximum, and mean doses as calculated on pre- and ceCT plans for the gross tumor volume was less than 1% for all anatomic sites. Similarly, the differences between mean and maximum doses for OAR were less than 1%. The difference in dose distribution between plans made on CTs with and without contrast enhancement was tolerable at all treatment sites. Therefore, although caution would be recommended when planning IM-SBRT for tumors near "reservoirs" for contrast media (such as the heart and urinary bladder), findings supported the use of ceCT with this dose calculation algorithm for both target delineation and IM-SBRT treatment planning.