Literature DB >> 31665709

Dosimetric performance of the Elekta Unity MR-linac system: 2D and 3D dosimetry in anthropomorphic inhomogeneous geometry.

E Pappas1, G Kalaitzakis, T Boursianis, E Zoros, K Zourari, E P Pappas, D Makris, I Seimenis, E Efstathopoulos, T G Maris.   

Abstract

Following the clinical introduction of the Elekta Unity MR-linac, there is an urgent need for development of dosimetry protocols and tools, not affected by the presence of a magnetic field. This work presents a benchmarking methodology comprising 2D/3D passive dosimetry and involving on-couch adaptive treatment planning, a unique step in MR-linac workflows. Two identical commercially available 3D-printed head phantoms (featuring realistic bone anatomy and MR/CT contrast) were employed. One phantom incorporated a film dosimetry insert, while the second was filled with polymer gel. Gel dose-response characteristics were evaluated under the Unity irradiation and read-out conditions, using vials and a cubic container filled with gel from the same batch. Treatment plan for the head phantoms involved a hypothetical large C-shape brain lesion, partly surrounding the brainstem. An IMRT step-and-shoot 7-beam plan was employed. Pre-treatment on-couch MR-images were acquired in order for the treatment planning system to calculate the virtual couch shifts and perform adaptive planning. Absolute 2D and relative 3D measurements were compared against calculations related to both adapted and original plans. Real-time dose accumulation monitoring in the gel-filled phantom was also performed. Results from the vials and cubic container suggest that gel dose-response is linear in the dose range investigated and signal integrity is mature at the read-out timings considered. Head phantom 2D and 3D measurements agreed well with calculations with 3D gamma index passing rates above 90% in all cases, even with the most stringent criteria used (2 mm/2%). By exploiting the 3D information provided by the gel, comparison also involved DVHs, dose-volume and plan quality metrics, which also reflected the agreement between adapted and delivered plans within  ±4%. No considerable discrepancies were detected between adapted and original plans. A novel methodology was developed and implemented, suitable for QA procedures in Unity. TPS calculations were validated within the experimental uncertainties involved.

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31665709     DOI: 10.1088/1361-6560/ab52ce

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  5 in total

1.  Robustness of single-isocenter multiple-metastasis stereotactic radiosurgery end-to-end testing across institutions.

Authors:  Daniel Saenz; Niko Papanikolaou; Emmanouil Zoros; Evangelos Pappas; Michael Reiner; Lip Teck Chew; Hooi Yin Lim; Sam Hancock; Alex Nebelsky; Christopher Njeh; Georgios Anagnostopoulos
Journal:  J Radiosurg SBRT       Date:  2021

2.  Dosimetric and geometric end-to-end accuracy of a magnetic resonance guided linear accelerator.

Authors:  Luisa S Stark; Nicolaus Andratschke; Michael Baumgartl; Marta Bogowicz; Madalyne Chamberlain; Riccardo Dal Bello; Stefanie Ehrbar; Zaira Girbau Garcia; Matthias Guckenberger; Jérôme Krayenbühl; Bertrand Pouymayou; Thomas Rudolf; Diem Vuong; Lotte Wilke; Mariangela Zamburlini; Stephanie Tanadini-Lang
Journal:  Phys Imaging Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-11-08

Review 3.  Radiation Dosimetry by Use of Radiosensitive Hydrogels and Polymers: Mechanisms, State-of-the-Art and Perspective from 3D to 4D.

Authors:  Yves De Deene
Journal:  Gels       Date:  2022-09-19

Review 4.  Medical physics challenges in clinical MR-guided radiotherapy.

Authors:  Christopher Kurz; Giulia Buizza; Guillaume Landry; Florian Kamp; Moritz Rabe; Chiara Paganelli; Guido Baroni; Michael Reiner; Paul J Keall; Cornelis A T van den Berg; Marco Riboldi
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-05-05       Impact factor: 3.481

5.  Dosimetric Effects of Air Cavities for MRI-Guided Online Adaptive Radiation Therapy (MRgART) of Prostate Bed after Radical Prostatectomy.

Authors:  Jonathan Pham; Minsong Cao; Stephanie M Yoon; Yu Gao; Amar U Kishan; Yingli Yang
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-01-12       Impact factor: 4.241

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.