摘要Objective To test a quality assurance (QA) DVS solution-DVS based on a linac electronic field imaging device (EPID) and evaluate its accuracy and ease of use. Methods All of the QA items that do not require the dedicated QA phantom in the DVS solution were tested. Test methods were chosen based on the test items: for the collimator rotation center, the coincidence of the radiation and mechanical, mechanical flatness/symmetry and MLC transmission were compared with the existing QA solution; for the leaf position accuracy and repeatability, the original preset beam fields and fields adjusted by 1 mm were compared. Results The collimator rotation center by the DVS solution is similar to the existing solution. For coincidence of radiation and mechanical, the DVS solution provides more data, including 3D distance. For the flatness / symmetry property, the DVS solution can display more graphics, but the overall data is less than the ion-chamber matrix solution. The DVS solution can directly obtain the MLC transmission value and quickly and intuitively measure the position accuracy of the MLC. However, the repeatability is slightly worse. Conclusion The DVS solution can improve the QA work efficiency and reduce workload, and there are more opportunities for improvement.
Abstract：Objective To test a quality assurance (QA) DVS solution-DVS based on a linac electronic field imaging device (EPID) and evaluate its accuracy and ease of use. Methods All of the QA items that do not require the dedicated QA phantom in the DVS solution were tested. Test methods were chosen based on the test items: for the collimator rotation center, the coincidence of the radiation and mechanical, mechanical flatness/symmetry and MLC transmission were compared with the existing QA solution; for the leaf position accuracy and repeatability, the original preset beam fields and fields adjusted by 1 mm were compared. Results The collimator rotation center by the DVS solution is similar to the existing solution. For coincidence of radiation and mechanical, the DVS solution provides more data, including 3D distance. For the flatness / symmetry property, the DVS solution can display more graphics, but the overall data is less than the ion-chamber matrix solution. The DVS solution can directly obtain the MLC transmission value and quickly and intuitively measure the position accuracy of the MLC. However, the repeatability is slightly worse. Conclusion The DVS solution can improve the QA work efficiency and reduce workload, and there are more opportunities for improvement.
通讯作者:
Tianlong Ji, Department of Radiotherapy,The First Hospital of China Medical University, Shenyang Liaoning 110042,China. E-mail address: 18040095029@163.com
引用本文:
Tianlong Ji, Lu Sun, Hao Shen, Guang Li. Application of a Quality Assurance Solution Based on an Electronic Field Imaging Device in Linac[J]. 中国生物医学工程学报(英文版）, 2020, 29(2): 10-16.
Tianlong Ji, Lu Sun, Hao Shen, Guang Li. Application of a Quality Assurance Solution Based on an Electronic Field Imaging Device in Linac. Chinese Journal of Biomedical Engineering, 2020, 29(2): 10-16.
[1] Barnes MP, Greer PB. Evaluation of the truebeam machine performance check (MPC) geometric checks for daily IGRT geometric accuracy quality assurance[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2017,18(3):200-206. [2] Barnes MP, Greer PB. Evaluation of the truebeam machine performance check (MPC): mechanical and collimation checks[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2017,18(3):56-66. [3] Barnes MP, Greer PB. Evaluation of the TrueBeam machine performance check (MPC) beam constancy checks for flattened and flattening filter-free (FFF) photon beams[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2017,18(1):139-150. [4] Binny D,Aland T,Archibald-Heeren BR,et al.A multi-institutional evaluation of machine performance check system on treatment beam output and symmetry using statistical process control[J].J Appl Clin Med Phys,2019,20(3):71-80. [5] Miri N, Keller P, Zwan BJ,et al.EPID-based dosimetry to verify IMRT planar dose distribution for the aS1200 EPID and FFF beams[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 2016,17(6):292-304. [6] Kumaraswamy LK, Xu Z, Bailey DW,et al.Evaluation of fluence-based dose delivery incorporating the spatial variation of dosimetric leaf gap (DLG)[J].J Appl Clin Med Phys,2016,17(1):12-21. [7] Bojechko C, Phillps M, Kalet A,et al.A quantification of the effectiveness of EPID dosimetry and software-based plan verification systems in detecting incidents in radiotherapy[J].Med Phys,2015,42(9):5363-5369. [8] Celi S, Costa E, Wessels C,et al.EPID based in vivo dosimetry system: clinical experience and results[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 2016, 17(3):262-276. [9] Han B, Ding A, Lu M,et al.Pixel response-based EPID dosimetry for patient specific QA[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 2017,18(1):9-17. [10] Zhuang AH, Olch AJ. Sensitivity study of an automated system for daily patient QA using EPID exit dose images[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2018,19(3):114-124. [11] Biltekin F, Yedekci Y, Ozyigit G. Feasibility of novel in vivo EPID dosimetry system for linear accelerator quality control tests[J]. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med, 2019,42(4):995-1009. [12] Meyers SM, Balderson MJ, Letourneau D. Evaluation of Elekta Agility multi-leaf collimator performance using statistical process control tools[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2019,20(7):100-108. [13] Kabat CN, Defoor DL, Myers P,et al.Evaluation of the Elekta Agility MLC performance using high-resolution log files[J]. Med Phys, 2019,46(3):1397-1407. [14] Chojnowski JM, Taylor LM, Sykes J R,et al.Assessing the dependency of the uncertainties in the Elekta Agility MLC calibration procedure on the focal spot position[J]. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med, 2020,43:93-96. [15] Riis HL, Ebert MA, Rowshanfarzad P. Detection of the focal spot motion relative to the collimator axis of a linear accelerator under gantry rotation[J]. Phys Med Biol,2019,64(3):2N-3N. [16] Huq MS, Hwang MS, Teo TP,et al.A dosimetric evaluation of the IAEA-AAPM TRS483 code of practice for dosimetry of small static fields used in conventional linac beams and comparison with IAEA TRS-398, AAPM TG51, and TG51 Addendum protocols[J]. Med Phys,2018. DOI: 10.1002/mp.13092. [17] Biston MC, Dupuis P, Gassa F,et al.Do all the linear accelerators comply with the ICRU 91's constraints for stereotactic body radiation therapy treatments[J]. Cancer Radiother,2019,23(6-7):625-629. [18] Hartgerink D, Swinnen A, Roberge D,et al. LINAC based stereotactic radiosurgery for multiple brain metastases: guidance for clinical implementation[J]. Acta Oncol,2019,58(9):1275-1282. [19] Xu Z, Warrell G, Lee S,et al.Assessment of beam-matched linacs quality/accuracy for interchanging SBRT or SRT patient using VMAT without replanning[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2019,20(1):68-75. [20] Pokhrel D, Sanford L, Halfman M,et al.Potential reduction of lung dose via VMAT with jaw tracking in the treatment of single-isocenter/two-lesion lung SBRT[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2019,20(5):55-63. [21] Wilke L, Andratschke N, Blanck O,et al.ICRU report 91 on prescribing, recording, and reporting of stereotactic treatments with small photon beams: Statement from the DEGRO/DGMP working group stereotactic radiotherapy and radiosurgery[J]. Strahlenther Onkol, 2019,195(3):193-198. [22] Woon W, Ravindran PB, Ekayanake P,et al.A study on the effect of detector resolution on gamma index passing rate for VMAT and IMRT QA[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2018,19(2):230-248. [23] Rijken J, Schachenmayr H, Crowe S,et al.Distributive quality assurance and delivery of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy treatments amongst beam matched linear accelerators: A feasibility study[J].J Appl Clin Med Phys,2019,20(4):99-105. [24] Sarkar V, Paxton A, Kunz J,et al.A systematic evaluation of the error detection abilities of a new diode transmission detector[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 2019,20(9):122-132. [25] Kang H, Patel R, Roeske JC. Efficient quality assurance method with automated data acquisition of a single phantom setup to determine radiation and imaging isocenter congruence[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2019,20(10):127-133. [26] Letourneau D,Keller H,Becker N,et al.Quality control methods for linear accelerator radiation and mechanical axes alignment[J]. Med Phys, 2018,45(6):2388-2398. [27] Chojnowski JM, Taylor LM,Sykes JR,et al.Beam focal spot position determination for an Elekta linac with the Agility((R)) head; practical guide with a ready-to-go procedure[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2018,19(4):44-47. [28] Zwan BJ,Barnes MP,Hindmarsh J,et al.Commissioning and quality assurance for VMAT delivery systems: An efficient time-resolved system using real-time EPID imaging[J]. Med Phys,2017,44(8):3909-3922. [29] Lebron S,Lu B,Yan G,et al.Parameterization of photon beam dosimetry for a linear accelerator[J]. Med Phys,2016,43(2):748-760. [30] Yaddanapudi S, Cai B, Harry T,et al.Rapid acceptance testing of modern linac using on-board MV and kV imaging systems[J]. Med Phys,2017,44(7):3393-3406. [31] Mutic S, Pawlicki T, Orton CG. EPID-based daily quality assurance of linear accelerators will likely replace other methods within the next ten years[J]. Med Phys,2016,43(6):2691-2693. [32] El Naqa I, Irrer J, Ritter TA,et al.Machine learning for automated quality assurance in radiotherapy: A proof of principle using EPID data description[J]. Medical Physics,2019,46(4):1914-1921. [33] Olch AJ, O'Meara K, Wong KK. First Report of the Clinical Use of a Commercial Automated System for Daily Patient QA Using EPID Exit Images[J]. Adv Radiat Oncol,2019,4(4):722-728. [34] Binny D, Lancaster CM, Kairn T,et al.Monitoring Daily QA 3 constancy for routine quality assurance on linear accelerators[J]. Phys Med,2016,32(11):1479-1487. [35] Sun B, Goddu SM,Yaddanapudi S,et al. Daily QA of linear accelerators using only EPID and OBI[J]. Medical Physics, 2015,42(10):5584-5594. [36] Li Y,Netherton T,Nitsch PL, et al.Independent validation of machine performance check for the Halcyon and TrueBeam linacs for daily quality assurance[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2018,19(5):375-382. [37] Hsieh ES, Hansen KS, Kent MS,et al. Can a commercially available EPID dosimetry system detect small daily patient setup errors for cranial IMRT/SRS-[J]. Pract Radiat Oncol,2017,7(4):e283-e290. [38] Gourdeau D,Gingras L,Beaulieu F,et al.An EPID-based method to determine mechanical deformations in a linear accelerator[J]. Medical Physics,2018,45(11):5054-5065. [39] Hirashima H,Nakamura M,Miyabe Y,et al.Quality assurance of non-coplanar, volumetric-modulated arc therapy employing a C-arm linear accelerator, featuring continuous patient couch rotation[J].Radiat Oncol,2019,14(1):62. [40] Moghadam SE,Nasseri S,Seyedi S S,et al.Evaluation of application of EPID for rapid QC testing of linear accelerator[J]. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother,2018,23(5):369-377. [41] Barnes MP, Menk FW, Lamichhane BP,et al. A proposed method for linear accelerator photon beam steering using EPID[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2018,19(5):591-597. [42] Defoor DL, Stathakis S, Roring JE,et al. Investigation of error detection capabilities of phantom, EPID and MLC log file based IMRT QA methods[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2017,18(4):172-179. [43] Cai B, Goddu SM, Yaddanapudi S,et al. Normalize the response of EPID in pursuit of linear accelerator dosimetry standardization[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys, 2018, 19(1):73-85. [44] Woon WA, Ravindran PB, Ekayanake P,et al.Trajectory log file sensitivity: A critical analysis using DVH and EPID[J]. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother,2018,23(5):346-359. [45] Brezovich IA, Wu X, Popple RA,et al.Stereotactic radiosurgery with MLC-defined arcs: Verification of dosimetry, spatial accuracy, and end-to-end tests[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2019,20(5):84-98. [46] Anvari A, Poirier Y, Sawant A. A comprehensive geometric quality assurance framework for preclinical microirradiators[J]. Med Phys, 2019, 46(4):1840-1851. [47] Agarwal A,Rastogi N,Maria D K,et al. Investigating the electronic portal imaging device for small radiation field measurements[J].J Med Phys,2017,42(2):59-64. [48] Rostampour N,Jabbari K,Nabavi Sh,et al. Dynamic MLC tracking using 4D lung tumor motion modelling and EPID feedback[J]. J Biomed Phys Eng, 2019,9(4):417-424. [49] Matsushita N, Nakamura M, Sasaki M,et al.Analyses of integrated EPID images for on-treatment quality assurance to account for interfractional variations in volumetric modulated arc therapy[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2020,21(1):110-116. [50] Babic S, Lee Y, Ruschin M,et al.To frame or not to frame Cone-beam CT-based analysis of head immobilization devices specific to linac-based stereotactic radiosurgery and radiotherapy[J]. J Appl Clin Med Phys,2018,19(2):111-120. [51] Brown A, Tan A, Cooper S, et al. Obesity does not influence prostate intrafractional motion[J]. J Med Radiat Sci, 2018,65(1):31-38. [52] Anvari A, Poirier Y, Sawant A. Development and implementation of EPID-based quality assurance tests for the small animal radiation research platform (SARRP)[J]. Med Phys,2018,45(7):3246-3257.
