Skip to main content

Assisted Probe Positioning for Ultrasound Guided Radiotherapy Using Image Sequence Classification

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2020 (MICCAI 2020)

Abstract

Effective transperineal ultrasound image guidance in prostate external beam radiotherapy requires consistent alignment between probe and prostate at each session during patient set-up. Probe placement and ultrasound image interpretation are manual tasks contingent upon operator skill, leading to interoperator uncertainties that degrade radiotherapy precision. We demonstrate a method for ensuring accurate probe placement through joint classification of images and probe position data. Using a multi-input multi-task algorithm, spatial coordinate data from an optically tracked ultrasound probe is combined with an image classifier using a recurrent neural network to generate two sets of predictions in real-time. The first set identifies relevant prostate anatomy visible in the field of view using the classes: outside prostate, prostate periphery, prostate centre. The second set recommends a probe angular adjustment to achieve alignment between the probe and prostate centre with the classes: move left, move right, stop. The algorithm was trained and tested on 9,743 clinical images from 61 treatment sessions across 32 patients. We evaluated classification accuracy against class labels derived from three experienced observers at 2/3 and 3/3 agreement thresholds. For images with unanimous consensus between observers, anatomical classification accuracy was 97.2% and probe adjustment accuracy was 94.9%. The algorithm identified optimal probe alignment within a mean (standard deviation) range of 3.7° (1.2°) from angle labels with full observer consensus, comparable to the 2.8° (2.6°) mean interobserver range. We propose such an algorithm could assist radiotherapy practitioners with limited experience of ultrasound image interpretation by providing effective real-time feedback during patient set-up.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Loblaw, A.: Ultrahypofractionation should be a standard of care option for intermediate-risk prostate cancer. Clin. Oncol. 32(3), 170–174 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Böckelmann, F., et al.: Adaptive radiotherapy and the dosimetric impact of inter- and intrafractional motion on the planning target volume for prostate cancer patients. Strahlenther. Onkol. 196(7), 647–656 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Tree, A., Ostler, P., van As, N.: New horizons and hurdles for UK radiotherapy: can prostate stereotactic body radiotherapy show the way? Clin. Oncol. (R. Coll. Radiol.) 26(1), 1–3 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Li, M., et al.: Comparison of prostate positioning guided by three-dimensional transperineal ultrasound and cone beam CT. Strahlenther. Onkol. 193(3), 221–228 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hilman, S., et al.: Implementation of a daily transperineal ultrasound system as image-guided radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Clin. Oncol. (R. Coll. Radiol.) 29(1), e49 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Presles, B., et al.: Semiautomatic registration of 3D transabdominal ultrasound images for patient repositioning during postprostatectomy radiotherapy. Med. Phys. 41(12), 122903 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Fargier-Voiron, M., et al.: Evaluation of a new transperineal ultrasound probe for inter-fraction image-guidance for definitive and post-operative prostate cancer radiotherapy. Phys. Med. 32(3), 499–505 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Camps, S.M., et al.: Automatic transperineal ultrasound probe positioning based on CT scan for image guided radiotherapy. In: Medical Imaging 2017: Image-Guided Procedures, Robotic Interventions, and Modeling (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Liu, S., et al.: Deep learning in medical ultrasound analysis: a review. Engineering 5(2), 261–275 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Yang, X., et al.: Fine-grained recurrent neural networks for automatic prostate segmentation in ultrasound images. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-First AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press: San Francisco, California, USA, pp. 1633–1639 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bonmati, E., et al.: Automatic segmentation method of pelvic floor levator hiatus in ultrasound using a self-normalizing neural network. J. Med. Imaging (Bellingham) 5(2), 021206 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Baumgartner, C.F., et al.: SonoNet: real-time detection and localisation of fetal standard scan planes in freehand ultrasound. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 36(11), 2204–2215 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pesteie, M., et al.: Automatic localization of the needle target for ultrasound-guided epidural injections. IEEE Trans. Med. Imaging 37(1), 81–92 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Grimwood, A., et al.: In vivo validation of elekta’s clarity autoscan for ultrasound-based intrafraction motion estimation of the prostate during radiation therapy. Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 102(4), 912–921 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Sandler, M., et al.: MobileNetV2: inverted residuals and linear bottlenecks. In: 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dwyer, A.: Matchmaking and McNemar in the comparison of diagnostic modalities. Radiology 178(2), 328–330 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Williams, G.W.: Comparing the joint agreement of several raters with another rater. Biometrics, 619–627 (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fleiss, J.L., Cohen, J.: The equivalence of weighted kappa and the intraclass correlation coefficient as measures of reliability. Educ. Psychol. Measure. 33(3), 613–619 (1973)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cicchetti, D.V., Feinstein, A.R.: High agreement but low kappa: II. Resolving the paradoxes. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 43(6), 551–558 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by NHS funding to the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at The Royal Marsden and The Institute of Cancer Research. The study was also supported by Cancer Research UK under Programmes C33589/A19727 and C20892/A23557, and by the Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences (203145Z/16/Z). The study was jointly supervised by Dr Emma J. Harris, Prof. Dean Barratt and Dr. Ester Bonmati. We thank the radiographers of the Royal Marsden Hospital for their clinical support, as well as David Cooper, Martin Lachaine and David Ash at Elekta for their technical support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alex Grimwood .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

1 Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PDF 177 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Grimwood, A., McNair, H., Hu, Y., Bonmati, E., Barratt, D., Harris, E.J. (2020). Assisted Probe Positioning for Ultrasound Guided Radiotherapy Using Image Sequence Classification. In: Martel, A.L., et al. Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2020. MICCAI 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12263. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59716-0_52

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59716-0_52

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-59715-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-59716-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics