首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 593 毫秒
1.
PurposeThis multi-institution study assessed the positioning accuracy of multileaf collimators (MLC) by analyzing log files. It determined the main machine parameters that affect MLC positioning errors for pre-TrueBeam (Clinac) and TrueBeam linacs.MethodsAround 30,000 dIMRT and VMAT log files belonging to 6 linacs from 4 different centers were analyzed. An in-house software was used to calculate 95th percentile and RMS error values and their correlation with certain parameters such as maximum leaf speed, mean leaf speed and gantry angle. The effect of MLC communication delay on error statistics was assessed in Clinac linacs. To that end MLC positioning error statistics were calculated with and without the delay effect.ResultsFor dIMRT treatments in Clinac linacs the mean leaf RMS error was 0.306 mm with and 0.030 mm without the delay effect. Leaf RMS error was closely linked to maximum and mean leaf speeds, but without the delay effect that link was weaker. No trend was observed between bank RMS error and gantry angle. Without the delay effect larger bank RMS errors were obtained for gantry angles with leaf movements against gravity. For VMAT treatments in TrueBeam linacs the mean leaf RMS error was 0.038 mm. A link was also observed between leaf RMS error and maximum and mean leaf speeds.ConclusionTrueBeam MLC positioning errors are substantially lower than those of Clinac linacs. In Clinac machines the analysis of dynalogs without the delay effect allows us to study the influence of factors that are masked by the delay effect.  相似文献   

2.
ObjectiveTo investigate the dosimetric behaviour, influence on photon beam fluence and error detection capability of Delta4 Discover transmission detector.MethodsThe transmission detector (TRD) was characterized on a TrueBeam linear accelerator with 6 MV beams. Linearity, reproducibility and dose rate dependence were investigated. The effect on photon beam fluence was evaluated in terms of beam profiles, percentage depth dose, transmission factor and surface dose for different open field sizes. The transmission factor of the 10x10 cm2 field was entered in the TPS’s configuration and its correct use in the dose calculation was verified recalculating 17 clinical IMRT/VMAT plans. Surface dose was measured for 20 IMRT fields. The capability to detect different delivery errors was investigated evaluating dose gamma index, MLC gamma index and leaf position of 15 manually modified VMAT plans.ResultsTRD showed a linear dependence on MU. No dose rate dependence was observed. Short-term and long-term reproducibility were within 0.1% and 0.5%. The presence of the TRD did not significantly affect PDDs and profiles. The transmission factor of the 10x10 cm2 field size was 0.985 and 0.983, for FF and FFF beams respectively. The 17 recalculated plans met our clinical gamma-index passing rate, confirming the correct use of the transmission factor by the TPS. The surface dose differences for the open fields increase for shorter SSDs and greater field size. Differences in surface dose for the IMRT beams were less than 2%. Output variation ≥2%, collimator angle variations within 0.3°, gantry angle errors of 1°, jaw tracking and leaf position errors were detected.ConclusionsDelta4 Discover shows good linearity and reproducibility, is not dependent on dose rate and does not affect beam quality and dose profiles. It is also capable to detect dosimetric and geometric errors and therefore it is suitable for monitoring VMAT delivery.  相似文献   

3.
AimDevelopment of bidirectional non-monotonic segmented leaf sequence (NSLS) MLC delivery technique compatible with Varian MLC for non-split IMRT fields reducing total monitor units (TotalMU) and the number of segments (NS) simultaneously and assessment of its efficiency using a plan scoring index (PSI).Materials and methodsThe optimal fluence of IMRT plans of ten patients of lung carcinoma, calculated using Eclipse TPS version 11.0 (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA, USA), was used to generate the segmented MLC fields using our newly developed equally spaced (ES) reducing level and NSLS algorithms in MATLAB® version 2011b for 6–10 intensity levels. These MLC fields were imported into the plans with the same field setup and the final dose was recalculated. The results were compared with those of commercially available multiple static segments (MSS) leaf motion calculation (LMC) algorithm and few previously published algorithms. Plan scoring index (PSI) and degree of modulation (DoM) was calculated to compare the quality of different plans for the same patient.ResultsThe average differences in TotalMU and NS with respect to MSS algorithm are −3.80% and −14.28% for the NSLS algorithm, respectively. The calculated average PSI and DoM is 0.75, 2.51 and 0.91, 2.41 for the MSS and NSLS algorithms, respectively.ConclusionsIMRT plans generated using the NSLS algorithm resulted in the best PSI, DoM values among all the leaf sequencing algorithms. Our proposed NSLS algorithm allows bidirectional delivery in Varian medical linear accelerator which is not commercially available. NSLS algorithm is efficient in reducing the TotalMU and NS with equivalent plan quality as that of MSS.  相似文献   

4.
PurposeIntroduce a new concept of dose field to assess the modulation complexity (MC) of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).MethodsA total of 91 IMRT plans for different diseases were retrospectively retrieved randomly from treatment database. The dose field of plans were calculated and feature values such as force magnitude and diversity were defined and extracted. Correlation analysis between these feature values and execution cost, delivery accuracy of plans was performed, to verify the validity of dose field in characterizing the MC.ResultsThe feature values of dose field in different disease own significant differences (p < 0.001). For correlation analysis, number of control point (CP) and cumulative perimeter of CP have the highest correlation with angle entropy (0.815 and 0.848 respectively), while the correlation between number of monitor units(MU), cumulative area of CP and force, force entropy is higher than others (0.797–0.909). However, complexity of CP shape is almost irrelevant to all the dose field features. The gamma passing rate and the dose field features shows a weak negative correlation trend.ConclusionsDose field can be used as a tool to assess the MC of IMRT.  相似文献   

5.

Aim

The aim of this study was to investigate the sensitivity of the trajectory log file based quality assurance to detect potential errors such as MLC positioning and gantry positioning by comparing it with EPID measurement using the most commonly used criteria of 3%/3?mm.

Materials and methods

An in-house program was used to modified plans using information from log files, which can then be used to recalculate a new dose distribution. The recalculated dose volume histograms (DVH) were compared with the originals to assess differences in target and critical organ dose. The dose according to the differences in DVH was also compared with dosimetry from an electronic portal imaging device.

Results

In all organs at risk (OARs) and planning target volumes (PTVs), there was a strong positive linear relationship between MLC positioning and dose error, in both IMRT and VMAT plans. However, gantry positioning errors exhibited little impact in VMAT delivery. For the ten clinical cases, no significant correlations were found between gamma passing rates under the criteria of 3%/3?mm for the composite dose and the mean dose error in DVH (r?<?0.3, P?>?0.05); however, a significant positive correlation was found between the gamma passing rate of 3%/3?mm (%) averaged over all fields and the mean dose error in the DVH of the VMAT plans (r?=?0.59, P?<?0.001).

Conclusions

This study has successfully shown the sensitivity of the trajectory log file to detect the impact of systematic MLC errors and random errors in dose delivery and analyzed the correlation of gamma passing rates with DVH.  相似文献   

6.
PurposeTo study the influence of Multileaf Collimator (MLC) leaf width in radiosurgery treatment planning for Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) and 3D Dynamic Conformal Arc Therapy (3D-DCA).Material and methods16 patients with solitary brain metastases treated with radiosurgery via the non-coplanar VMAT were replanned for the 3D-DCA. For each planning technique two MLC leaf width sizes were utilized, i.e. 5 mm and 2.5 mm. These treatment plans were compared using dosimetric indices (conformity, gradient and mean dose for brain tissue) and the normal tissue complication probability (NTCP).ResultsAn improvement in planning quality for VMAT was observed versus 3D-DCA for any MLC leaf width, mainly with regards to dose conformity and to a lesser extent regards dose gradient. No significant difference was observed for any of both techniques using smaller leaf width. However, dose gradient was improved in favor of the 2.5 mm MLC for either of both techniques (15% VMAT and 10% 3D-DCA); being noticeable for lesions smaller than 10 cm3. Nonetheless, the NTCP index was not significantly affected by variations in the dose gradient index.ConclusionsThis, our present study, suggests that the use of an MLC leaf width of 2.5 mm via the noncoplanar VMAT and 3D-DCA techniques provides improvement in terms of dose gradient for small volumes, over those results obtained with an MLC leaf width of 5 mm. The 3D-DCA does also benefit from MLC leaf widths of a smaller size, mainly in terms of conformity.  相似文献   

7.
BackgroundThere is limited data on error detectability for step-and-shoot intensity modulated radiotherapy (sIMRT) plans, despite significant work on dynamic methods. However, sIMRT treatments have an ongoing role in clinical practice. This study aimed to evaluate variations in the sensitivity of three patient-specific quality assurance (QA) devices to systematic delivery errors in sIMRT plans.Materials and methodsFour clinical sIMRT plans (prostate and head and neck) were edited to introduce errors in: Multi-Leaf Collimator (MLC) position (increasing field size, leaf pairs offset (1–3 mm) in opposite directions; and field shift, all leaves offset (1–3 mm) in one direction); collimator rotation (1–3 degrees) and gantry rotation (0.5–2 degrees). The total dose for each plan was measured using an ArcCHECK diode array. Each field, excluding those with gantry offsets, was also measured using an Electronic Portal Imager and a MatriXX Evolution 2D ionisation chamber array. 132 plans (858 fields) were delivered, producing 572 measured dose distributions. Measured doses were compared to calculated doses for the no-error plan using Gamma analysis with 3%/3 mm, 3%/2 mm, and 2%/2 mm criteria (1716 analyses).ResultsGenerally, pass rates decreased with increasing errors and/or stricter gamma criteria. Pass rate variations with detector and plan type were also observed. For a 3%/3 mm gamma criteria, none of the devices could reliably detect 1 mm MLC position errors or 1 degree collimator rotation errors.ConclusionsThis work has highlighted the need to adapt QA based on treatment plan type and the need for detector specific assessment criteria to detect clinically significant errors.  相似文献   

8.
PurposeDynamic 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.Methods16 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 0.5 mm. 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.ResultsThe 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/3 mm (per beam and composite plan) and 3%G/2 mm (composite plan) for the diode array phantom and 2%G/2 mm (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.ConclusionsA 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/3 mm per beam gamma setting.  相似文献   

9.
PurposeTo study the sensitivity of an ArcCHECK dosimeter in detecting delivery errors during the delivery of Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT).MethodsThree types of errors in Multi Leaf Collimator (MLC) position and dose delivery were simulated separately in the delivery of five prostate and five head and neck (H&N) VMAT plans: (i) Gantry independent: a systematic shift in MLC position and variation in output to the whole arc; (ii) Gantry dependent: sag in MLC position and output variation as a function of gantry angle; (iii) Control point specific MLC and output errors introduced to only a specific number of Control Points (CP). The difference in local and global gamma (γ) pass rate between the no-error and error-simulated measurements with 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm tolerances was calculated to assess the sensitivity of ArcCHECK. The clinical impact of these errors was also calculated.ResultsArcCHECK was able to detect a minimum 3 mm MLC error and 3% output error for Gantry independent errors using either local or global gamma with 2%/2 mm tolerance. For the Gantry dependent error scenario a minimum 3 mm MLC error and 3% dose error was identifiable by ArcCHECK using either global or local gamma with 2%/2 mm tolerance. In errors introduced to specific CPs a MLC error of 10 mm and dose error of 100% introduced to 4CPs were detected by ArcCHECK.ConclusionArcCHECK used with either local or global gamma analysis and 2%/2 mm criteria can be confidently used in the clinic to detect errors above the stated error values.  相似文献   

10.
PurposeTo perform a detailed evaluation of dose calculation accuracy and clinical feasibility of Mobius3D. Of particular importance, multileaf collimator (MLC) modeling accuracy in the Mobius3D dose calculation algorithm was investigated.MethodsMobius3D was fully commissioned by following the vendor-suggested procedures, including dosimetric leaf gap (DLG) optimization. The DLG optimization determined an optimal DLG correction factor which minimized the average difference between calculated and measured doses for 13 patient volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans. Two sets of step-and-shoot plans were created to examine MLC and off-axis open fields modeling accuracy of the Mobius3D dose calculation algorithm: MLC test set and off-axis open field test set. The test plans were delivered to MapCHECK for the MLC tests and an ionization chamber for the off-axis open field test, and these measured doses were compared to Mobius3D-calculated doses.ResultsThe mean difference between the calculated and measured doses across the 13 VMAT plans was 0.6% with an optimal DLG correction factor of 1.0. The mean percentage of pixels passing gamma from a 3%/1 mm gamma analysis for the MLC test set was 43.5% across the MLC tests. For the off-axis open field tests, the Mobius3D-calculated dose for 1.5 cm square field was −4.6% lower than the chamber-measured dose.ConclusionsIt was demonstrated that Mobius3D has dose calculation uncertainties for small fields and MLC tongue-and-groove design is not adequately taken into consideration in Mobius3D. Careful consideration of DLG correction factor, which affects the resulting dose distributions, is required when commissioning Mobius3D for patient-specific QA.  相似文献   

11.
AimTo examine the impact of beam rate on dose distribution in IMRT plans and then to evaluate agreement of calculated and measured dose distributions for various beam rate values.BackgroundAccelerators used in radiotherapy utilize some beam rate modes which can shorten irradiation time and thus reduce ability of patient movement during a treatment session. This aspect should be considered in high conformal dynamic techniques.Materials and methodsDose calculation was done for two different beam rates (100 MU/min and 600 MU/min) in an IMRT plan. For both, a comparison of Radiation Planning Index (RPI) and MU was conducted. Secondly, the comparison of optimal fluence maps and corresponding actual fluence maps was done. Next, actual fluence maps were measured and compared with the calculated ones. Gamma index was used for that assessment. Additionally, positions of each leaf of the MLC were controlled by home made software.ResultsDose distribution obtained for lower beam rates was slightly better than for higher beam rates in terms of target coverage and risk structure protection. Lower numbers of MUs were achieved in 100 MU/min plans than in 600 MU/min plans. Actual fluence maps converted from optimal ones demonstrated more similarity in 100 MU/min plans. Better conformity of the measured maps to the calculated ones was obtained when a lower beam rate was applied. However, these differences were small. No correlation was found between quality of fluence map conversion and leaf motion accuracy.ConclusionExecution of dynamic techniques is dependent on beam rate. However, these differences are minor. Analysis shows a slight superiority of a lower beam rate. It does not significantly affect treatment accuracy.  相似文献   

12.
PurposeTo quantify the impact of simulated errors for nasopharynx radiotherapy across multiple institutions and planning techniques (auto-plan generated Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (ap-VMAT), manually planned VMAT (mp-VMAT) and manually planned step and shoot Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (mp-ssIMRT)).MethodsTen patients were retrospectively planned with VMAT according to three institution’s protocols. Within one institution two further treatment plans were generated using differing treatment planning techniques. This resulted in mp-ssIMRT, mp-VMAT, and ap-VMAT plans. Introduced treatment errors included Multi Leaf Collimator (MLC) shifts, MLC field size (MLCfs), gantry and collimator errors. A change of more than 5% in most selected dose metrics was considered to have potential clinical impact. The original patient plan total Monitor Units (MUs) were correlated to the total number of dose metrics exceeded.ResultsThe impact of different errors was consistent, with ap-VMAT plans (two institutions) showing larger dose deviations than mp-VMAT created plans (one institution). Across all institutions’ VMAT plans the significant errors included; ±5° for the collimator angle, ±5 mm for the MLC shift and +1, ±2 and ±5 mm for the MLC field size. The total number of dose metrics exceeding tolerance was positively correlated to the VMAT total plan MUs (r = 0.51, p < 0.001), across all institutions and techniques.ConclusionsDifferences in VMAT robustness to simulated errors across institutions occurred due to planning method differences. Whilst ap-VMAT was most sensitive to MLC errors, it also produced the best quality treatment plans. Mp-ssIMRT was most robust to errors. Higher VMAT treatment plan complexity led to less robust plans.  相似文献   

13.
PurposeTo evaluate the Integral Quality Monitor (IQM) as a clinical dosimetry device for detecting photon beam delivery errors in clinically relevant conditions.Materials and methodsThe IQM’s ability to detect delivery errors introduced into clinical VMAT plans for two different treatment sites was assessed. This included measuring 103 nasopharynx VMAT plans and 78 lung SBRT VMAT plans with introduced errors in gantry angle (1–5°) and in MLC-defined field size and field shift (1–5 mm). The IQM sensitivity was compared to ArcCheck detector performance. Signal dependence on field position for on-axis and asymmetrically offset square field sizes from 1 × 1 cm2 to 30 × 30 cm2 was also investigated.ResultsThe IQM detected almost all introduced clinically-significant MLC field size errors, but not some small gantry angle errors or most MLC field shift errors. The IQM sensitivity was comparable to the ArcCheck for lung SBRT, but worse for the nasopharynx plans. Differences between IQM calculated/predicted and measured signals were within ± 2% for all on-axis square fields, but up to 60% for the smallest asymmetrically offset fields at large offsets.Conclusion The IQM performance was consistent and reproducible. It showed highest sensitivity to the field size errors for these plans, but did not detect some clinically-significant introduced gantry angle errors or most MLC field shift errors. The IQM calculation model is still being developed, which should improve small offset-field performance. Care is required in IQM use for plan verification or online monitoring, especially for small fields that are off-axis in the detector gradient direction.  相似文献   

14.
PurposeTo investigate the effectiveness of an EPID-based 3D transit dosimetry system in detecting deliberately introduced errors during VMAT delivery.MethodsAn Alderson phantom was irradiated using four VMAT treatment plans (one prostate, two head-and-neck and one lung case) in which delivery, thickness and setup errors were introduced. EPID measurements were performed to reconstruct 3D dose distributions of “error” plans, which were compared with “no-error” plans using the mean gamma (γmean), near-maximum gamma (γ1%) and the difference in isocenter dose (ΔDisoc) as metrics.ResultsOut of a total of 42 serious errors, the number of errors detected was 33 (79%), and 27 out of 30 (90%) if setup errors are not included. The system was able to pick up errors of 5 mm movement of a leaf bank, a wrong collimator rotation angle and a wrong photon beam energy. A change in phantom thickness of 1 cm was detected for all cases, while only for the head-and-neck plans a 2 cm horizontal and vertical shift of the phantom were alerted. A single leaf error of 5 mm could be detected for the lung plan only.ConclusionAlthough performed for a limited number of cases and error types, this study shows that EPID-based 3D transit dosimetry is able to detect a number of serious errors in dose delivery, leaf bank position and patient thickness during VMAT delivery. Errors in patient setup and single leaf position can only be detected in specific cases.  相似文献   

15.
PurposeTo conduct patient-specific geometric and dosimetric quality assurance (QA) for the Dynamic WaveArc (DWA) using logfiles and ArcCHECK (Sun Nuclear Inc., Melbourne, FL, USA).MethodsTwenty DWA plans, 10 for pituitary adenoma and 10 for prostate cancer, were created using RayStation version 4.7 (RaySearch Laboratories, Stockholm, Sweden). Root mean square errors (RMSEs) between the actual and planned values in the logfiles were evaluated. Next, the dose distributions were reconstructed based on the logfiles. The differences between dose-volumetric parameters in the reconstructed plans and those in the original plans were calculated. Finally, dose distributions were assessed using ArcCHECK. In addition, the reconstructed dose distributions were compared with planned ones.ResultsThe means of RMSEs for the gantry, O-ring, MLC position, and MU for all plans were 0.2°, 0.1°, 0.1 mm, and 0.4 MU, respectively. Absolute means of the change in PTV D99% were 0.4 ± 0.4% and 0.1 ± 0.1% points between the original and reconstructed plans for pituitary adenoma and prostate cancer, respectively. The mean of the gamma passing rate (3%/3 mm) between the measured and planned dose distributions was 97.7%. In addition, that between the reconstructed and planned dose distributions was 99.6%.ConclusionsWe have demonstrated that the geometric accuracy and gamma passing rates were within AAPM 119 and 142 criteria during DWA. Dose differences in the dose-volumetric parameters using the logfile-based dose reconstruction method were also clinically acceptable in DWA.  相似文献   

16.
PurposeThe aim of this study was to investigate the sensitivity of the gamma-index method according to various gamma criteria for volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT).MethodsTwenty head and neck (HN) and twenty prostate VMAT plans were retrospectively selected for this study. Both global and local 2D gamma evaluations were performed with criteria of 3%/3 mm, 2%/2 mm, 1%/2 mm and 2%/1 mm. In this study, the global and local gamma-index calculated the differences in doses relative to the maximum dose and the dose at the current measurement point, respectively. Using log files acquired during delivery, the differences in parameters at every control point between the VMAT plans and the log files were acquired. The differences in dose–volumetric parameters between reconstructed VMAT plans using the log files and the original VMAT plans were calculated. The Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (rs) were calculated between the passing rates and those differences.ResultsConsiderable correlations with statistical significances were observed between global 1%/2 mm, local 1%/2 mm and local 2%/1 mm and the MLC position differences (rs = −0.712, −0.628 and −0.581). The numbers of rs values with statistical significance between the passing rates and the changes in dose–volumetric parameters were largest in global 2%/2 mm (n = 16), global 2%/1 mm (n = 15) and local 2%/1 mm (n = 13) criteria.ConclusionLocal gamma-index method with 2%/1 mm generally showed higher sensitivity to detect deviations between a VMAT plan and the delivery of the VMAT plan.  相似文献   

17.

Aim

To evaluate the new Octavius 4D system for patient specific quality assurance and to study the correlation between plan complexity and gamma index analysis in patient specific quality assurance of VMAT using the Octavius 4D system.

Background

McNiven (2010) proposed a study to evaluate the utility of a complexity metric, the Modulation Complexity Score, to evaluate the relationship of the metric with deliverability in IMRT.

Materials and methods

Evaluation of the Octavius 4D system was carried out by gamma evaluation of user defined MLC created patterns and AAPM TG 119 benchmark plans. The relationship between plan complexity expressed as Modulation Complexity Score (MCS) and the gamma index analysis was established by a planar and volumetric gamma analysis of 106 clinically approved VMAT patient plans of different sites.

Results

Average volumetric 3D global gamma evaluation (3 mm/3%) results for the evaluation plans was 97.41% for 6 MV X-rays and 98.30% for 15 MV X-rays. Average MCS values for the head and neck, pelvic and thoracic plans were 0.2224, 0.3615 and 0.1874. Average volumetric 3D global gamma analysis (3 mm/3%) results for the head and neck, pelvic and thoracic VMAT plans were 95.45%, 97.51% and 96.98%, respectively. Out of 90 correlation analyses between the MCS and gamma passing rate, only 3 had the r value greater than 0.5.

Conclusions

The Octavius 4D system is a suitable device for patient specific pretreatment QA. Global and local gamma analysis results showed a weak correlation with the MCS.  相似文献   

18.
PurposeThis study proposed a synchronous measurement method for patient-specific dosimetry using two three-dimensional dose verification systems with delivery errors.MethodsTwenty hypofractionated radiotherapy treatment plans for patients with lung cancer were retrospectively reviewed. Monitor unit (MU) changes, leaf in-position errors, and angles of deviation of the collimator were intentionally introduced to investigate the detection sensitivity of the EDose + EPID (EE) and Dolphin + Compass (DC) systems.ResultsBoth systems accurately detected the MU modifications and had a similar ability to detect leaf in-position errors. The detection of multi-leaf collimator (MLC) errors was difficult for the whole body using different gamma criteria. When the introduced MLC error was 1.0 mm, the numbers of errors detected in the clinical target volume (CTV) by the EE system were 20, 20, and 20 and the numbers of errors detected by the DC system were 18, 19, and 20, at 3%/2 mm, 2%/2 mm, and 1%/1 mm, respectively. The average dose deviation of all DVH parameters exceeded 3%. The gamma and DVH evaluation results remained unchanged for the DC system when different collimator angle errors were introduced. The number of errors detected by the EE system was <11 for each anatomical structure for all gamma criteria. The mean dose deviation of the CTV was not distinguished.ConclusionsThis synchronous measurement approach can effectively eliminate the influence of random errors during treatment. The EE and DC systems reconstruct the three-dimensional dose distribution accurately and are convenient and reliable for dose verification.  相似文献   

19.
PurposeThis work aimed to characterize and compare the complexity of the plans created in the context of a national IMRT/VMAT audit. A plan complexity score is proposed to summarize all the evaluated complexity features.Materials and methodsNine complexity metrics have been computed for the audit plans, evaluating different complexity aspects. An approach based on Principal Component Analysis was followed to explore the correlation between the metrics and derive a smaller set of new uncorrelated variables (principal components, PCs). The resulting PCs were then used to calculate a plan complexity score. Plan quality was also assessed and the correlation between plan complexity, quality and deliverability investigated using the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient.ResultsThe first two PCs explained over 90% of the total variance in the original dataset. Their representation allowed to identify patterns in the data, namely a clear separation between plans created using different technologies/techniques. The calculated plan complexity score quantified these differences. Sliding window Eclipse plans were found to be the most complex and VMAT Eclipse group presented the highest complexity variability, for the evaluated parameters. Concerning plan quality, no differences between treatment technology/technique have been identified. However, plans with larger number of monitor units tended to be associated with higher deviations between calculated and measured doses.ConclusionsThe proposed plan complexity score allowed to summarize the differences not only inter- but also intra-groups of technologies/techniques, paving the way for improvement of the planning strategies at the national level through knowledge sharing.  相似文献   

20.
AimTo study the sensitivity of three commercial dosimetric systems, Delta4, Multicube and Octavius4D, in detecting Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) delivery errors.MethodsFourteen prostate and head and neck (H&N) VMAT plans were considered for this study. Three types of errors were introduced into the original plans: gantry angle independent and dependent MLC errors, and gantry angle dependent dose errors. The dose matrix measured by each detector system for the no-error and error introduced delivery were compared with the reference Treatment Planning System (TPS) calculated dose matrix for no-error plans using gamma (γ) analysis with 2%/2 mm tolerance criteria. The ability of the detector system in identifying the minimum error in each scenario was assessed by analysing the gamma pass rates of no error delivery and error delivery using a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. The relative sensitivity of the system was assessed by determining the slope of the gamma pass line for studied error magnitude in each error scenario.ResultsIn the gantry angle independent and dependent MLC error scenario the Delta4, Multicube and Octavius4D systems detected a minimum 2 mm error. In the gantry angle dependent dose error scenario all studied systems detected a minimum 3% and 2% error in prostate and H&N plans respectively. In the studied detector systems Multicube showed relatively less sensitivity to the errors in the majority of error scenarios.ConclusionThe studied systems identified the same magnitude of minimum errors in all considered error scenarios.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号