Literature DB >> 26429233

Daily QA of linear accelerators using only EPID and OBI.

Baozhou Sun1, S Murty Goddu1, Sridhar Yaddanapudi1, Camille Noel1, Hua Li1, Bin Cai1, James Kavanaugh1, Sasa Mutic1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: As treatment delivery becomes more complex, there is a pressing need for robust quality assurance (QA) tools to improve efficiency and comprehensiveness while simultaneously maintaining high accuracy and sensitivity. This work aims to present the hardware and software tools developed for comprehensive QA of linear accelerator (LINAC) using only electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) and kV flat panel detectors.
METHODS: A daily QA phantom, which includes two orthogonally positioned phantoms for QA of MV-beams and kV onboard imaging (OBI) is suspended from the gantry accessory holder to test both geometric and dosimetric components of a LINAC and an OBI. The MV component consists of a 0.5 cm water-equivalent plastic sheet incorporating 11 circular steel plugs for transmission measurements through multiple thicknesses and one resolution plug for MV-image quality testing. The kV-phantom consists of a Leeds phantom (TOR-18 FG phantom supplied by Varian) for testing low and high contrast resolutions. In the developed process, the existing LINAC tools were used to automate daily acquisition of MV and kV images and software tools were developed for simultaneous analysis of these images. A method was developed to derive and evaluate traditional QA parameters from these images [output, flatness, symmetry, uniformity, TPR20/10, and positional accuracy of the jaws and multileaf collimators (MLCs)]. The EPID-based daily QA tools were validated by performing measurements on a detuned 6 MV beam to test its effectiveness in detecting errors in output, symmetry, energy, and MLC positions. The developed QA process was clinically commissioned, implemented, and evaluated on a Varian TrueBeam LINAC (Varian Medical System, Palo Alto, CA) over a period of three months.
RESULTS: Machine output constancy measured with an EPID (as compared against a calibrated ion-chamber) is shown to be within ±0.5%. Beam symmetry and flatness deviations measured using an EPID and a 2D ion-chamber array agree within ±0.5% and ±1.2% for crossline and inline profiles, respectively. MLC position errors of 0.5 mm can be detected using a picket fence test. The field size and phantom positioning accuracy can be determined within 0.5 mm. The entire daily QA process takes ∼15 min to perform tests for 5 photon beams, MLC tests, and imaging checks.
CONCLUSIONS: The exclusive use of EPID-based QA tools, including a QA phantom and simultaneous analysis software tools, has been demonstrated as a viable, efficient, and comprehensive process for daily evaluation of LINAC performance.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26429233     DOI: 10.1118/1.4929550

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


  16 in total

1.  Investigating the Electronic Portal Imaging Device for Small Radiation Field Measurements.

Authors:  Arpita Agarwal; Nikhil Rastogi; K J Maria Das; S A Yoganathan; D Udayakumar; Shaleen Kumar
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2017 Apr-Jun

2.  An electronic portal image device (EPID)-based multiplatform rapid daily LINAC QA tool.

Authors:  Yangguang Ma; Xuemin Wang; Rizhen Mai; Tao Wang; Yuntong Pei; Shuaipeng Liu; Yuexin Guo
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 2.102

3.  Evaluation of application of EPID for rapid QC testing of linear accelerator.

Authors:  Shahla Ebrahimi Moghadam; Shahrokh Nasseri; Seyedeh Somayeh Seyedi; Hamid Gholamhosseinian; Mehdi Momennezhad
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2018-08-13

4.  Visual Isocenter Position Enhanced Review (VIPER): a Cherenkov imaging-based solution for MR-linac daily QA.

Authors:  Daniel A Alexander; Petr Bruza; Aris G Rassias; Jacqueline M Andreozzi; Brian W Pogue; Rongxiao Zhang; David J Gladstone
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2021-05-09       Impact factor: 4.506

5.  Evaluation of the TrueBeam machine performance check (MPC) beam constancy checks for flattened and flattening filter-free (FFF) photon beams.

Authors:  Michael P Barnes; Peter B Greer
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-11-30       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Normalize the response of EPID in pursuit of linear accelerator dosimetry standardization.

Authors:  Bin Cai; S Murty Goddu; Sridhar Yaddanapudi; Douglas Caruthers; Jie Wen; Camille Noel; Sasa Mutic; Baozhou Sun
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-11-10       Impact factor: 2.102

7.  Sensitivity study of an automated system for daily patient QA using EPID exit dose images.

Authors:  Audrey H Zhuang; Arthur J Olch
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2018-03-06       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Evaluation of the truebeam machine performance check (MPC) geometric checks for daily IGRT geometric accuracy quality assurance.

Authors:  Michael P Barnes; Peter B Greer
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2017-03-22       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  A proposed method for linear accelerator photon beam steering using EPID.

Authors:  Michael P Barnes; Frederick W Menk; Bishnu P Lamichhane; Peter B Greer
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2018-07-26       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  Equivalency of beam scan data collection using a 1D tank and automated couch movements to traditional 3D tank measurements.

Authors:  Nels C Knutson; Matthew C Schmidt; Matthew D Belley; Ngoc Nguyen; Michael Price; Sasa Mutic; Erno Sajo; H Harold Li
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2018-09-06       Impact factor: 2.102

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.