Literature DB >> 27394690

Incorrect dosimetric leaf separation in IMRT and VMAT treatment planning: Clinical impact and correlation with pretreatment quality assurance.

Maria Sjölin1, Jens Morgenthaler Edmund2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Dynamic treatment planning algorithms use a dosimetric leaf separation (DLS) parameter to model the multi-leaf collimator (MLC) characteristics. Here, we quantify the dosimetric impact of an incorrect DLS parameter and investigate whether common pretreatment quality assurance (QA) methods can detect this effect.
METHODS: 16 treatment plans with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique for multiple treatment sites were calculated with a correct and incorrect setting of the DLS, corresponding to a MLC gap difference of 0.5mm. Pretreatment verification QA was performed with a bi-planar diode array phantom and the electronic portal imaging device (EPID). Measurements were compared to the correct and incorrect planned doses using gamma evaluation with both global (G) and local (L) normalization. Correlation, specificity and sensitivity between the dose volume histogram (DVH) points for the planning target volume (PTV) and the gamma passing rates were calculated.
RESULTS: The change in PTV and organs at risk DVH parameters were 0.4-4.1%. Good correlation (>0.83) between the PTVmean dose deviation and measured gamma passing rates was observed. Optimal gamma settings with 3%L/3mm (per beam and composite plan) and 3%G/2mm (composite plan) for the diode array phantom and 2%G/2mm (composite plan) for the EPID system were found. Global normalization and per beam ROC analysis of the diode array phantom showed an area under the curve <0.6.
CONCLUSIONS: A DLS error can worsen pretreatment QA using gamma analysis with reasonable credibility for the composite plan. A low detectability was demonstrated for a 3%G/3mm per beam gamma setting.
Copyright © 2016 Associazione Italiana di Fisica Medica. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Dosimetry; MLC; QA; VMAT

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27394690     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejmp.2016.06.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med        ISSN: 1120-1797            Impact factor:   2.685


  2 in total

1.  Analysis of dose comparison techniques for patient-specific quality assurance in radiation therapy.

Authors:  Liting Yu; Timothy L S Tang; Naasiha Cassim; Alexander Livingstone; Darren Cassidy; Tanya Kairn; Scott B Crowe
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2019-10-15       Impact factor: 2.102

2.  Potential dose variability for small-field plans delivered with Elekta Agility collimators.

Authors:  Joseph J Foy; Poonam Yadav; Indra J Das
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2021-07-13       Impact factor: 2.102

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.