PURPOSE: The aim of this work is to evaluate the geometric accuracy of a prerelease version of a new six degrees of freedom (6DoF) couch. Additionally, a quality assurance method for 6DoF couches is proposed. METHODS: The main principle of the performance tests was to request a known shift for the 6DoF couch and to compare this requested shift with the actually applied shift by independently measuring the applied shift using different methods (graph paper, laser, inclinometer, and imaging system). The performance of each of the six axes was tested separately as well as in combination with the other axes. Functional cases as well as realistic clinical cases were analyzed. The tests were performed without a couch load and with a couch load of up to 200 kg and shifts in the range between -4 and +4 cm for the translational axes and between -3° and +3° for the rotational axes were applied. The quality assurance method of the new 6DoF couch was performed using a simple cube phantom and the imaging system. RESULTS: The deviations (mean ± one standard deviation) accumulated over all performance tests between the requested shifts and the measurements of the applied shifts were -0.01 ± 0.02, 0.01 ± 0.02, and 0.01 ± 0.02 cm for the longitudinal, lateral, and vertical axes, respectively. The corresponding values for the three rotational axes couch rotation, pitch, and roll were 0.03° ± 0.06°, -0.04° ± 0.12°, and -0.01° ± 0.08°, respectively. There was no difference found between the tests with and without a couch load of up to 200 kg. CONCLUSIONS: The new 6DoF couch is able to apply requested shifts with high accuracy. It has the potential to be used for treatment techniques with the highest demands in patient setup accuracy such as those needed in stereotactic treatments. Shifts can be applied efficiently and automatically. Daily quality assurance of the 6DoF couch can be performed in an easy and efficient way. Long-term stability has to be evaluated in further tests.
PURPOSE: The aim of this work is to evaluate the geometric accuracy of a prerelease version of a new six degrees of freedom (6DoF) couch. Additionally, a quality assurance method for 6DoF couches is proposed. METHODS: The main principle of the performance tests was to request a known shift for the 6DoF couch and to compare this requested shift with the actually applied shift by independently measuring the applied shift using different methods (graph paper, laser, inclinometer, and imaging system). The performance of each of the six axes was tested separately as well as in combination with the other axes. Functional cases as well as realistic clinical cases were analyzed. The tests were performed without a couch load and with a couch load of up to 200 kg and shifts in the range between -4 and +4 cm for the translational axes and between -3° and +3° for the rotational axes were applied. The quality assurance method of the new 6DoF couch was performed using a simple cube phantom and the imaging system. RESULTS: The deviations (mean ± one standard deviation) accumulated over all performance tests between the requested shifts and the measurements of the applied shifts were -0.01 ± 0.02, 0.01 ± 0.02, and 0.01 ± 0.02 cm for the longitudinal, lateral, and vertical axes, respectively. The corresponding values for the three rotational axes couch rotation, pitch, and roll were 0.03° ± 0.06°, -0.04° ± 0.12°, and -0.01° ± 0.08°, respectively. There was no difference found between the tests with and without a couch load of up to 200 kg. CONCLUSIONS: The new 6DoF couch is able to apply requested shifts with high accuracy. It has the potential to be used for treatment techniques with the highest demands in patient setup accuracy such as those needed in stereotactic treatments. Shifts can be applied efficiently and automatically. Daily quality assurance of the 6DoF couch can be performed in an easy and efficient way. Long-term stability has to be evaluated in further tests.
Authors: Luis Muñoz; Tomas Kron; Marco Petasecca; Joseph Bucci; Michael Jackson; Peter Metcalfe; Anatoly B Rosenfeld; Giordano Biasi Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2021-01-13 Impact factor: 2.102
Authors: Ning Wen; Haisen Li; Kwang Song; Karen Chin-Snyder; Yujiao Qin; Jinkoo Kim; Maria Bellon; Misbah Gulam; Stephen Gardner; Anthony Doemer; Suneetha Devpura; James Gordon; Indrin Chetty; Farzan Siddiqui; Munther Ajlouni; Robert Pompa; Zane Hammoud; Michael Simoff; Steven Kalkanis; Benjamin Movsas; M Salim Siddiqui Journal: J Appl Clin Med Phys Date: 2015-07-08 Impact factor: 2.102