A real time dose monitoring and dose reconstruction tool for patient specific VMAT QA and delivery

被引:33
|
作者
Tyagi, Neelam [1 ]
Yang, Kai [1 ]
Gersten, David [1 ]
Yan, Di [1 ]
机构
[1] William Beaumont Hosp, Dept Radiat Oncol, Royal Oak, MI 48073 USA
关键词
linac data monitor; VMAT; integral error; leaf position errors; gantry errors; VOLUMETRIC MODULATED ARC; QUALITY-ASSURANCE; THERAPY; SYSTEM; IMRT;
D O I
10.1118/1.4764482
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Purpose: To develop a real time dose monitoring and dose reconstruction tool to identify and quantify sources of errors during patient specific volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) delivery and quality assurance. Methods: The authors develop a VMAT delivery monitor tool called linac data monitor that connects to the linac in clinical mode and records, displays, and compares real time machine parameters with the planned parameters. A new measure, called integral error, keeps a running total of leaf overshoot and undershoot errors in each leaf pair, multiplied by leaf width, and the amount of time during which the error exists in monitor unit delivery. Another tool reconstructs Pinnacle(3)(TM) format delivered plan based on the saved machine logfile and recalculates actual delivered dose in patient anatomy. Delivery characteristics of various standard fractionation and stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) VMAT plans delivered on Elekta Axesse and Synergy linacs were quantified. Results: The MLC and gantry errors for all the treatment sites were 0.00 +/- 0.59 mm and 0.05 +/- 0.31 degrees, indicating a good MLC gain calibration. Standard fractionation plans had a larger gantry error than SBRT plans due to frequent dose rate changes. On average, the MLC errors were negligible but larger errors of up to 6 mm and 2.5 degrees were seen when dose rate varied frequently. Large gantry errors occurred during the acceleration and deceleration process, and correlated well with MLC errors (r = 0.858, p = 0.0004). PTV mean, minimum, and maximum dose discrepancies were 0.87 +/- 0.21%, 0.99 +/- 0.59%, and 1.18 +/- 0.52%, respectively. The organs at risk (OAR) doses were within 2.5%, except some OARs that showed up to 5.6% discrepancy in maximum dose. Real time displayed normalized total positive integral error (normalized to the total monitor units) correlated linearly with MLC (r = 0.9279, p < 0.001) and gantry errors (r = 0.742, p = 0.005). There is a strong correlation between total integral error and PTV mean (r = 0.683, p = 0.015), minimum (r = 0.6147, p = 0.033), and maximum dose (r = 0.6038, p = 0.0376). Conclusions: Errors may exist during complex VMAT planning and delivery. Linac data monitor is capable of detecting and quantifying mechanical and dosimetric errors at various stages of planning and delivery. (C) 2012 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1118/1.4764482]
引用
收藏
页码:7194 / 7204
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] BEST IN PHYSICS (THERAPY) - A Real Time Dose Monitoring and Dose Reconstruction Tool for Patient Specific VMAT QA and Delivery
    Yang, K.
    Gersten, D.
    Yan, D.
    Tyagi, N.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 39 (06) : 3867 - 3867
  • [2] Influence of dose specification on prostate VMAT patient-specific QA results
    Clemente Gutierrez, F.
    Perez Vara, C.
    Clavo Herranz, M.
    Lopez Carrizosa, C.
    Saez Garrido, J.
    Ibanez Villoslada, C.
    Couselo Paniagua, M.
    Zapatero Ortuno, J.
    Martin de Miguel, M.
    Dominguez Morcillo, M.
    Jerviz Guia, V.
    Calapaqui Teran, A.
    Guijarro Verdu, M.
    Navarro, J.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2016, 119 : S726 - S726
  • [3] Dose reconstruction for real-time patient-specific dose estimation in CT
    De Man, Bruno
    Wu, Mingye
    FitzGerald, Paul
    Kalra, Mannudeep
    Yin, Zhye
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 42 (05) : 2740 - 2751
  • [4] VMAT QA: Measurement-guided 4D dose reconstruction on a patient
    Nelms, Benjamin E.
    Opp, Daniel
    Robinson, Joshua
    Wolf, Theresa K.
    Zhang, Geoffrey
    Moros, Eduardo
    Feygelman, Vladimir
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 39 (07) : 4228 - 4238
  • [5] Real-Time Dose Reconstruction for Treatment Monitoring
    Jiang, Y.
    Gu, X.
    Men, C.
    Jia, X.
    Li, R.
    Lewis, J.
    Jiang, S.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2010, 37 (06)
  • [6] Correlation between tolerances for EPID metrics and CI dose deviation for patient-specific VMAT QA
    Martin, G.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2023, 182 : S1470 - S1472
  • [7] Feasibility of dose delivery error detection by a transmission detector for patient-specific QA
    Honda, H.
    Kubo, K.
    Yamamoto, R.
    Ishii, Y.
    Kanzaki, H.
    Hamamoto, Y.
    Mochizuki, T.
    Oita, M.
    Sasaki, M.
    Tominaga, M.
    Uto, Y.
    [J]. RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2017, 123 : S787 - S788
  • [8] Phantomless patient-specific TomoTherapy QA via delivery performance monitoring and a secondary Monte Carlo dose calculation
    Handsfield, Lydia L.
    Jones, Ryan
    Wilson, David D.
    Siebers, Jeffery V.
    Read, Paul W.
    Chen, Quan
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2014, 41 (10)
  • [9] A Software Tool of Extracting Dose Plane for Tomotherapy Delivery QA
    Zhang, J.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 39 (06) : 3794 - 3794
  • [10] Comparison of Shallow Fluence to Deep Point Dose Measurements for Spine VMAT SBRT Patient-Specific QA
    Cheung, J.
    Held, M.
    Morin, O.
    Weethee, B.
    Chuang, C.
    Perez-Andujar, A.
    Sudhyadhom, A.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2015, 42 (06) : 3192 - 3192