Table 1.
Studies comparing TAUS or TPUS with other imaging techniques used for IGRT. The first column details the first author and year of publication. ∗ indicates that the paper was also included in [11, 12]. The second column details the used US technique: TAUS (Clarity) or TPUS (Clarity Autoscan). The third column indicates the parameters varied in the study. The fourth column indicates the image modality used for comparison with FM (fiducial marker) and EPI (electronic portal imaging). The columns five and six detail the number of patients and the number of acquired scans, respectively. Most studies reported the difference using mean ± standard deviation (SD) (column seven); however, one study used the error notation [13]. The square brackets indicate absolute values. The final column details the Bland-Altman Limits of Agreement (LoA) or, if this was not reported, the range of measured differences denoted between [ ].
| First author | US | Parameters | Compared with |
# pts | # US scans | Difference: mean ± SD [mm] | Bland-Altman/Range [mm] | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AP | LR | SI | AP | LR | SI | ||||||
| Cury∗ (2006) [14] | TAUS | - | CT | 10 | 30 | −0.2 ± 1.6 | 0.2 ± 1.7 | 0.1 ± 1.4 | - | - | - |
|
| |||||||||||
| Johnston∗ (2008) [15] | TAUS | Assisted segmentation | FM (EPI) | 8 | 255 | 1.3 ± 6.6 | 0.9 ± 4.0 | 1.3 ± 5.1 | −11.7–14.3 | −7–8.8 | −8.8–11.4 |
| Manual segmentation | FM (EPI) | 7 | 181 | 2.1 ± 4.6 | 0.8 ± 3.5 | 0.2 ± 4.5 | −6.8–11.1 | −6.0–7.7 | −8.7–9.0 | ||
|
| |||||||||||
| Robinson∗ (2012) [16] | TAUS | (1) All datasets | CT | 17 | CT: 136 US: 272 | 10.3 ± 7.9 | [1.3–61.4] | ||||
| (2) Remove insufficient data | CT | - | US: 210 | 8.7 ± 4.9 | [1.0–40.0] | ||||||
| (3) Review (2) manufacturer | CT | - | US: 153 | 7.4 ± 3.1 | [1.8–17.1] | ||||||
|
| |||||||||||
| Van Der Meer∗ (2013) [17] | TAUS | - | FM (EPI) | 8 | 244 | −2.3 ± 3.6 | 2.5 ± 4.0 | 0.6 ± 4.9 | −9.3–4.7 | −5.4–10.3 | −8.9–10.2 |
|
| |||||||||||
| Mayyas∗ (2013) [13] | TAUS | - | Bone (EPI) | 27 | 1100 |
μ: −0.7 Σ: 2.4 σ: 3.4 |
μ: −0.5 Σ: 1.6 σ: 3.2 |
μ: −1.0 Σ: 2.4 σ: 3.6 |
μ = mean error Σ = systematic error [18] σ = random error |
||
|
| |||||||||||
| Li (2015) [19] | TAUS | - | FM (CBCT) | 6 | 78 | 0.0 ± 3.0 | −0.2 ± 2.7 | −1.9 ± 2.3 | [−7.3–7.2] | [−5.6–6.9] | [−10.0–2.9] |
|
| |||||||||||
| Fargier-Voiron (2015) [20] | TAUS | Raw database | CBCT | 25 | 284 | 2.8 ± 4.1 | 0.5 ± 3.3 | −0.9 ± 4.2 | −5.3–10.9 | −5.9–6.9 | −9.0–7.3 |
| Data corrected by mean US-CBCT difference of first 3 fractions | CBCT | 25 | 284 | −0.5 ± 3.9 | 0.3 ± 3.0 | −1.0 ± 4.2 | −8.1–7.1 | −5.6–6.2 | −7.7–7.3 | ||
|
| |||||||||||
| Krengli (2016) [21] | TAUS | - | 3D surface image | 40 | 1318 | −1.2 ± 4.9 | −0.7 ± 5.0 | −2.6 ± 6.4 | [−25.8–18.0] | [−48.8–15.9] | [−22.5–22.1] |
|
| |||||||||||
| Richter (2016) [22] | TPUS | - | CBCT | 10 | 150 | [3.0 ± 2.4] | [2.7 ± 2.3] | [3.2 ± 2.7] | −7.1–8.2 | −8–5 | −9.4–6.5 |
|
| |||||||||||
| Fargier-Voiron (2016) [23] | TPUS | With intrafraction motion | CBCT | 12 | 357 | 1.9 ± 3.2 | 0.2 ± 2.6 | 0.7 ± 2.6 | −4.3–8.1 | −4.4–5.8 | 4.9–5.3 |
| No intrafraction motion | CBCT | 12 | 357 | 2.8 ± 3 | −0.1 ± 2.5 | −0.3 ± 2.5 | −3.2–8.8 | −5–4.7 | −5.1–4.6 | ||
|
| |||||||||||
| Trivedi (2017) [24] | TPUS | - | FM (CT) | 17 | 30 | −0.06 ± 2.86 | 0.63 ± 3.27 | −0.49 ± 3.49 | [−4.55–7.52] | [−5.96–7.06] | [−6.70–6.78] |
|
| |||||||||||
| Li (2017) [25] | TPUS | - | FM (CBCT) | 7 | 177 | 0.3 ± 1.7 | 0.0 ± 1.7 | 0.2 ± 2.0 | [−4.2–5.5] | [−4.8–3.9] | [−4.5–5.7] |