Literature DB >> 22482606

RapidArc patient specific mechanical delivery accuracy under extreme mechanical limits using linac log files.

Krishni Wijesooriya1, Eric Aliotta, Stanley Benedict, Paul Read, Tyvin Rich, James Larner.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of RapidArc (RA) delivery for treatment machine operation near allowable mechanical limits in dynamic multileaf collimator (DMLC) leaf velocities, gantry speeds, and dose rates.
METHODS: Thirty RA patient plans were created for treatment of lung, gastrointestinal, and head and neck cancers on a Trilogy unit. For each patient, three RA plans were generated; one with medium MLC velocities, highest gantry speeds, and dose rates (case A); one with maximal allowable MLC leaf velocities (case B); and one with lowest gantry speeds (case C). Combinations of dose rates (140-600 MU/min), gantry speeds (2-5.4°/s), and DMLC leaf velocities (1.3-2.4 cm/s) were utilized to test the RapidArc delivery accuracy. Linac delivery log files were acquired after delivery of each plan. In-house developed software was used to read in the original RapidArc DICOM plan and update the plan to reflect the delivered plan by using the leaf position (L), gantry position (G), and MU dose values (D) extracted from the linac log files. This modified DICOM RT plan was imported back to ECLIPSE and the delivered 3D dose map recomputed. Finally, the planned and delivered 3D isodose maps were compared under three criteria to evaluate the dosimetric differences: maximum percentage dose difference, 3D gamma analysis criteria for 3%/3mm DTA, number of dose voxels having a dose difference that is greater than 1%, 2%, or 3% of the maximum dose, and their respective percentages.
RESULTS: For the three cases indicated above, MLC leaf position discrepancies between planned and delivered values are 0.8 ± 0.2, 1.2 ± 0.2, and 0.8 ± 0.2 mm; the maximum gantry position discrepancies are 0.9° ± 0.2°, 0.9° ± 0.2°, and 0.6° ± 0.1°, and the maximum differences in delivered MU per control point are 0.2 ± 0.1, 0.2 ± 0.1, and 0.04 ± 0.01, respectively. Maximum percentage dose difference observed is 6.7%, for a case where 1 cm MLC leaves were used with high MLC leaf velocity. Maximum number (percentage) of dose voxels having a dose difference that is greater than 1%, 2%, and 3% of the maximum dose were 4761 (0.35%), 897 (0.07%), and 188 (0.01%). This also corresponds to the plan utilizing the most number of 1 cm MLC leaves. The 3D Gamma factor acceptance rates are better than 99%.
CONCLUSIONS: This work shows that the accuracy of RapidArc delivery holds across the full range of gantry speeds, leaf velocities, and dose rates with small dosimetric uncertainties for 0.5 cm MLC leaves. However, caution should be exercised when using large MLC leaves in RapidArc. A novel technique to obtain the delivered 3D dose distributions using machine log files is also presented.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22482606     DOI: 10.1118/1.3690464

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  6 in total

1.  Commissioning and quality assurance of Dynamic WaveArc irradiation.

Authors:  Sayaka Sato; Yuki Miyabe; Kunio Takahashi; Masahiro Yamada; Mitsuhiro Nakamura; Yoshitomo Ishihara; Kenji Yokota; Shuji Kaneko; Takashi Mizowaki; Hajime Monzen; Masahiro Hiraoka
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-03-08       Impact factor: 2.102

2.  Machine learning models to predict the delivered positions of Elekta multileaf collimator leaves for volumetric modulated arc therapy.

Authors:  Sruthi Sivabhaskar; Ruiqi Li; Arkajyoti Roy; Neil Kirby; Mohamad Fakhreddine; Nikos Papanikolaou
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-06-07       Impact factor: 2.243

3.  Insensitivity of machine log files to MLC leaf backlash and effect of MLC backlash on clinical dynamic MLC motion: An experimental investigation.

Authors:  Michael Barnes; Dennis Pomare; Marcus Doebrich; Therese S Standen; Joshua Wolf; Peter Greer; John Simpson
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2022-06-09       Impact factor: 2.243

4.  Evaluation of dosimetric effect caused by slowing with multi-leaf collimator (MLC) leaves for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT).

Authors:  Zhengzheng Xu; Iris Z Wang; Lalith K Kumaraswamy; Matthew B Podgorsak
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2016-02-16       Impact factor: 2.991

5.  Patient-Specific Quality Assurance Using Monte Carlo Dose Calculation and Elekta Log Files for Prostate Volumetric-Modulated Arc Therapy.

Authors:  Yoshiyuki Katsuta; Noriyuki Kadoya; Yukio Fujita; Eiji Shimizu; Kenichi Matsunaga; Kinya Sawada; Haruo Matsushita; Kazuhiro Majima; Keiichi Jingu
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2017-12-05

6.  Correlation of phantom-based and log file patient-specific QA with complexity scores for VMAT.

Authors:  Christina E Agnew; Denise M Irvine; Conor K McGarry
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.