Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 25, 2026

Author Spotlight: Three-Dimensional Cephalometric Landmark Annotation Demonstration on Human Cone Beam Computed Tomography Scans
Published on: September 8, 2023
Both four-dimensional computed tomography and four-dimensional cone beam computed tomography under-predict lung
Elisabeth Steiner1, Chun-Chien Shieh1, Vincent Caillet2
1ACRF Image X Institute, The University of Sydney Central Clinical School, Australia.
Background And Purpose:
To test the hypothesis that 4DCT and 4DCBCT-measured target motion ranges predict target motion ranges during lung cancer SABR.
Materials And Methods:
Ten lung SABR patients were implanted with Calypso beacons. 4DCBCT was reconstructed for 29 fractions (1-4fx/patient) from a 1 min CBCT scan. The beacon centroid motion segmented for all 4DCT and 4DCBCT bins was compared with the real-time imaging and treatment beacon centroid ("target") motion range (4SDs) for each fraction. We tested the hypotheses that (1) 4DCT and 4CBCT predict treatment motion range and (2) there is no difference between 4DCT and 4DCBCT for predicting treatment motion range. Phase-wise root-mean-square errors (RMSEs) between imaging and treatment motion and reconstructed motion (4DCT, 4DCBCT) were calculated. Relationships between motion ranges in 4DCT and 4DCBCT and imaging and treatment motion ranges were investigated for the superior-inferior (SI), left-right (LR) and anterior-posterior (AP) directions. Baseline drifts and amplitude variability were investigated as potential factors leading to motion misrepresentation.
Results:
SI 4DCT, 4DCBCT, imaging and treatment motion ranges were 6.3 ± 3.6 mm, 7.1 ± 4.5 mm, 11.1 ± 7.5 mm and 10.9 ± 6.9 mm, respectively. Similar 4DCT and 4DCBCT under-predictions were observed in the LR and AP directions. Hypothesis (1) was rejected (p < 0.0001). Treatment target motion range was under-predicted in 4DCT by factors of 1.7, 1.9 and 1.7 and in 4DCBCT by factors of 1.5, 1.6 and 1.6 in the SI, LR, and AP directions, respectively. RMSEs were generally lower for end-exhale than inhale. 4DCBCT showed higher correlations with the imaging and treatment target motion than 4DCT and testing hypothesis (2) a statistically significant difference between 4DCT and 4DCBCT was shown in the SI direction (p = 0.03).
Conclusion:
For lung SABR patients both 4DCT and 4DCBCT significantly under-predict treatment target motion ranges.
More Related Videos
11:49Using High Resolution Computed Tomography to Visualize the Three Dimensional Structure and Function of Plant Vasculature
Published on: April 5, 2013
09:37Extracting Metrics for Three-dimensional Root Systems: Volume and Surface Analysis from In-soil X-ray Computed Tomography Data
Published on: April 26, 2016
Related Concept Videos
Computed Tomography
The technique was invented in the 1970s and is based on the principle that as X-rays pass through the body, they are absorbed or reflected at different levels. In the technique, a patient lies on a motorized platform while a computerized axial tomography (CAT) scanner rotates...
Imaging Studies III: Computed Tomography
Dimensional Analysis
Conversion Factors and Dimensional Analysis
The unit...
Dimensional Analysis
In fluid mechanics, dimensional...
Dimensional Analysis
Dimensional analysis allows us to analyze and compare physical quantities on a...
Design Example: Traverse Angle Computations