Target transport using CARDIO-RT software showed substantial structural differences compared to manual target transfer in 5 clinical cases.
Does target transport using CARDIO-RT software differ from manual target transfer for the fusion of electroanatomical mapping and radiotherapy planning imaging in cardiac radioablation?
A novel software (CARDIO-RT) for fusing electroanatomical mapping and radiotherapy planning imaging shows substantial differences compared to manual target transfer, highlighting the importance of standardized quality assurance in cardiac radioablation.
A novel quality assurance process for electroanatomical mapping (EAM)-to-radiotherapy planning imaging (RTPI) target transport was assessed within the multi-center multi-platform framework of the RAdiosurgery for VENtricular TAchycardia (RAVENTA) trial. A stand-alone software (CARDIO-RT) was developed to enable platform independent registration of EAM and RTPI of the left ventricle (LV), based on pre-generated radiotherapy contours (RTC). LV-RTC were automatically segmented into the American-Heart-Association 17-segment-model and a manual 3D-3D method based on EAM 3D-geometry data and a semi-automated 2D-3D method based on EAM screenshot projections were developed. The quality of substrate transfer was evaluated in five clinical cases and the structural analyses showed substantial differences between manual target transfer and target transport using CARDIO-RT.
Mayinger et al. (Mon,) conducted a other in Ventricular tachycardia (n=5). CARDIO-RT software vs. Manual target transfer was evaluated on Quality of substrate transfer. Target transport using CARDIO-RT software showed substantial structural differences compared to manual target transfer in 5 clinical cases.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: