MRI and FUNDUS image fusion for improved ocular biometry in Ocular Proton Therapy

Uncertainties in ocular proton planning and their impact on required margins

PURPOSE

To review required margins in ocular proton therapy (OPT) based on an uncertainty estimation and to compare them with widely used values. Further, uncertainties when using registered funduscopy images in the 3D model is investigated.

METHODS

An uncertainty budget in planning and delivery was defined to determine required aperture and range margins. Setup uncertainties were considered for a cohort of treated patients and tested in a worst-case estimation. Other uncertainties were based on a best-guess and knowledge of institutional specifics, e.g. range reproducibility. Margins for funduscopy registration were defined resulting from scaling, rotation and translation of the image. Image formation for a wide-field fundus camera was reviewed and compared to the projection employed in treatment planning systems.

RESULTS

Values for aperture and range with margins of 2.5 mm as reported in literature could be determined. Aperture margins appear appropriate for setup uncertainties below 0.5 mm, but depend on lateral penumbra. Range margins depend on depth and associated density uncertainty in tissue. Registration of funduscopy images may require margins of >2 mm, increasing towards the equator. Difference in the projection may lead to discrepancies of several mm.

CONCLUSIONS

The commonly used 2.5 mm aperture margin was validated as an appropriate choice, while range margins could be reduced for lower ranges. Margins may however not include uncertainties in contouring and possible microscopic spread. If a target base is contoured on registered funduscopy images care must be taken as they are subject to larger uncertainties. Multimodal imaging approach in OPT remains advisable.

Correction Method for Optical Scaling of Fundoscopy Images: Development, Validation, and First Implementation

Purpose

Although fundus photography is extensively used in ophthalmology, refraction prevents accurate distance measurement on fundus images, as the resulting scaling differs between subjects due to varying ocular anatomy. We propose a PARaxial Optical fundus Scaling (PAROS) method to correct for this variation using commonly available clinical data.

Methods

The complete optics of the eye and fundus camera were modeled using ray transfer matrix formalism to obtain fundus image magnification. The subject's ocular geometry was personalized using biometry, spherical equivalent of refraction (RSE), keratometry, and/or corneal topography data. The PAROS method was validated using 41 different eye phantoms and subsequently evaluated in 44 healthy phakic subjects (of whom 11 had phakic intraocular lenses [pIOLs]), 29 pseudophakic subjects, and 21 patients with uveal melanoma.

Results

Validation of the PAROS method showed small differences between model and actual image magnification (maximum 3.3%). Relative to the average eye, large differences in fundus magnification were observed, ranging from 0.79 to 1.48. Magnification was strongly inversely related to RSE (R2 = 0.67). In phakic subjects, magnification was directly proportional to axial length (R2 = 0.34). The inverse relation was seen in pIOL (R2 = 0.79) and pseudophakic (R2 = 0.12) subjects. RSE was a strong contributor to magnification differences (1%-83%). As this effect is not considered in the commonly used Bennett-Littmann method, statistically significant differences up to 40% (mean absolute 9%) were observed compared to the PAROS method (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The significant differences in fundus image scaling observed among subjects can be accurately accounted for with the PAROS method, enabling more accurate quantitative assessment of fundus photography.

Deterioration of Visual Acuity after Brachytherapy and Proton Therapy of Uveal Melanoma, and Methods of Counteracting This Complication Based on Recent Publications

Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary intraocular malignancy in adults. The eyeball is the most common extracutaneous location of melanoma. UM is a huge threat to a patient's life. It metastasizes distantly via blood vessels, but it can also spread locally and infiltrate extraocular structures. The treatment uses surgical methods, which include, among others, enucleation and conservative methods, such as brachytherapy (BT), proton therapy (PT), stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT), stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), transpupillary thermotherapy (TTT) and photodynamic therapy. The key advantage of radiotherapy, which is currently used in most patients, is the preservation of the eyeball with the risk of metastasis and mortality comparable to that of enucleation. Unfortunately, radiotherapy very often leads to a significant deterioration in visual acuity (VA) as a result of radiation complications. This article is a review of the latest research on ruthenium-106 (Ru-106) brachytherapy, iodine-125 (I-125) brachytherapy and proton therapy of uveal melanoma that took into account the deterioration of eye function after therapy, and also the latest studies presenting the new concepts of modifications to the applied treatments in order to reduce radiation complications and maintain better visual acuity in treated patients.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Clinical Care for Uveal Melanoma Patients-A Systematic Review from an Ophthalmic Perspective

Conversely to most tumour types, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was rarely used for eye tumours. As recent technical advances have increased ocular MRI's diagnostic value, various clinical applications have been proposed. This systematic review provides an overview of the current status of MRI in the clinical care of uveal melanoma (UM) patients, the most common eye tumour in adults. In total, 158 articles were included. Two- and three-dimensional anatomical scans and functional scans, which assess the tumour micro-biology, can be obtained in routine clinical setting. The radiological characteristics of the most common intra-ocular masses have been described extensively, enabling MRI to contribute to diagnoses. Additionally, MRI's ability to non-invasively probe the tissue's biological properties enables early detection of therapy response and potentially differentiates between high- and low-risk UM. MRI-based tumour dimensions are generally in agreement with conventional ultrasound (median absolute difference 0.5 mm), but MRI is considered more accurate in a subgroup of anteriorly located tumours. Although multiple studies propose that MRI's 3D tumour visualisation can improve therapy planning, an evaluation of its clinical benefit is lacking. In conclusion, MRI is a complementary imaging modality for UM of which the clinical benefit has been shown by multiple studies.

Automatic Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance-based measurements of tumour prominence and basal diameter for treatment planning of uveal melanoma

Background and Purpose

Three-dimensional (3D) Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is increasingly used to complement conventional two-dimensional ultrasound in the assessment of tumour dimension measurement of uveal melanoma. However, the lack of definitions of the 3D measurements of these tumour dimensions hinders further adaptation of MRI in ocular radiotherapy planning. In this study, we composed 3D MR-based definitions of tumour prominence and basal diameter and compared them to conventional ultrasound.

Materials and methods

Tumours were delineated on 3DT2 and contrast-enhanced 3DT1 (T1gd) MRI for 25 patients. 3D definitions of tumour prominence and diameter were composed and evaluated automatically on the T1gd and T2 contours. Automatic T1gd measurements were compared to manual MRI measurements, to automatic T2 measurements and to manual ultrasound measurements.

Results

Prominence measurements were similar for all modalities (median absolute difference 0.3 mm). Automatic T1gd diameter measurements were generally larger than manual MRI, automatic T2 and manual ultrasound measurements (median absolute differences of 0.5, 1.6 and 1.1 mm respectively), mainly due to difficulty defining the axis of the largest diameter. Largest differences between ultrasound and MRI for both prominence and diameter were found in anteriorly located tumours (up to 1.6 and 4.5 mm respectively), for which the tumour extent could not entirely be visualized with ultrasound.

Conclusions

The proposed 3D definitions for tumour prominence and diameter agreed well with ultrasound measurements for tumours for which the extent was visible on ultrasound. 3D MRI measurements generally provided larger diameter measurements than ultrasound. In anteriorly located tumours, the MRI measurements were considered more accurate than conventional ultrasound.