SU-E-T-169: Characterization and Evaluation of Octavius 4D System for Patient Specific Quality Assurance Using 3D Gamma Index Analysis in VMAT

2013 ◽  
Vol 40 (6Part13) ◽  
pp. 243-243
Author(s):  
R Dhanabalan ◽  
N Vivekanandan ◽  
J Prakash ◽  
S Prabakar ◽  
R Arulpandiyan
2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dhanabalan Rajasekaran ◽  
Prakash Jeevanandam ◽  
Prabakar Sukumar ◽  
Arulpandiyan Ranganathan ◽  
Samdevakumar Johnjothi ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 81-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfram Laub ◽  
Charles R. Thomas

81 Background: Patient-specific quality assurance measurements are time consuming and Gamma pass/fail criteria are often picked based on typical criteria used for IMRT QA measurements in the past. The questions needs to be asked if with these criteria QA plans could still show clinically significant deviations from the treatment plan calculated and how we should be doing QA for treatment delivery of complex treatment plans. In our study DICOM files of clinical Rapidarc plans were modified with in-house developed software to mimic leaf alignment errors and gravitation shifts. The Octavius 2D-ARRAY (PTW-Freiburg) and the Delta4 device (Scandidos) were used to investigate the effect of the simulated errors on the passing rate of quality assurance results. The manipulated Rapidarc plans were recalculated on patient CT scans in Eclipse. Methods: Three different types of errors were simulated and applied to five prostate (two arcs), three 2-arc head and neck cases and three 3-arc head and neck cases. The MLC modifications were: (1) both MLC banks are opened by 0.25mm, 0.50mm and 1.00mm in opposing directions resulting in larger fields, (2) both MLC banks are closed by 0.10mm, 0.25mm and 0.50mm, (3) both MLC banks are shifted in the same direction for lateral gantry angles to simulate effects of gravitational forces onto the leaves by 1mm, 2mm and 3mm, (4) 25%, 50% 70% and 100% of all active leaves are shifted by 3mm as in (3). QA evaluations were performed according to a gamma-index criterion of 3mm and 3% as well as 2mm and 2%. Results: All unmodified plans and the majority of the plans with the smallest modification pass the gamma-index criterion of 2%/2mm with >90%. After that the passing rate drops below 90%. For the largest modifications passing rates were typically below 85%. The Delta4 is generally more sensitive and the passing rate for modified plans drops below 90% earlier and more drastically. With the standard criteria (3mm, 3%) even the largest modifications would satisfy a >90% passing rate. Conclusions: A stricter gamma-index (2mm, 2%) is necessary in order to detect MLC positional errors and a passing rate of >90% should be expected. Clinical pass/fail criteria need to be developed.


2012 ◽  
Vol 39 (12) ◽  
pp. 7626-7634 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Stasi ◽  
S. Bresciani ◽  
A. Miranti ◽  
A. Maggio ◽  
V. Sapino ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (02) ◽  
pp. 210-214
Author(s):  
R. P. Srivastava ◽  
C. De Wagter

AbstractPurposeIn advanced radiotherapy techniques such as intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), the quality assurance (QA) process is essential. The aim of the study was to assure the treatment planning dose delivered during delivery of complex treatment plans. The QA standard is to perform patient-specific comparisons between planned doses and doses measured in a phantom.Materials and methodThe Delta 4 phantom (Scandidos, Uppsala, Sweden) has been used in this study. This device consists of diode matrices in two orthogonal planes inserted in a cylindrical acrylic phantom. Each diode is sampled per beam pulse so that the dose distribution can be evaluated on segment-by-segment, beam-by-beam, or as a composite plan from a single set of measurements. Ninety-five simple and complex radiotherapy treatment plans for different pathologies, planned using a treatment planning system (TPS) were delivered to the QA device. The planned and measured dose distributions were then compared and analysed. The gamma index was determined for different pathologies.ResultsThe evaluation was performed in terms of dose deviation, distance to agreement and gamma index passing rate. The measurements were in excellent agreement between with the calculated dose of the TPS and the QA device. Overall, good agreement was observed between measured and calculated doses in most cases with gamma values above 1 in >95% of measured points. Plan results for each test met the recommended dose goals.ConclusionThe delivery of IMRT and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans was verified to correspond well with calculated dose distributions for different pathologies. We found the Delta 4 device is accurate and reproducible. Although Delta4 appears to be a straightforward device for measuring dose and allows measure in real-time dosimetry QA, it is a complex device and careful quality control is required before its use.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-33
Author(s):  
Vikram Rathore ◽  
◽  
Mr. V.K Mishra ◽  
Dr. V Choudhary ◽  
Mr. G.S. Gautam ◽  
...  

Introduction: Volumetric Arc Radiotherapy (VMAT) is an advanced technique. Calculations of VMATplans are not so accurate even with State-of-Art dose calculation algorithms due to their complexity.Hence pre-treatment patient specific Quality Assurance (QA) of each VMAT plan is required. In thepresent study Electronic Portal Imaging Device (EPID) based portal dosimetry system was used forpre-treatment patient specific QA. Material and Methods: A total of 50 patients were chosen inthis study. Verification plans of each patient were calculated for portal dosimetry then executed onthe EPID system to measure the spatial distribution of radiation dose. Calculated and measured dosedistribution were compared to evaluate Gamma Index (GI) passing criteria of Dose Difference (DD)of 3% and Distance–to-Agreement (DTA) of 3mm, Area Gamma (γ% ≤1) >95%, Average Gamma(gAve) <0.5% and Maximum Gamma (gMax) <3.5%. Results: The mean values of Area Gamma (γ%≤1) were observed to be varied from 99.14±0.23% to 99.87±0.18%. The Mean Values of AverageGamma (gAve) are found to vary from 0.19±0.05% to 0.15±0.04% and the mean values ofMaximum Gamma (gMax) found to be varied from 1.94±0.37% to 1.59±0.41%. All the plans werepassed the gamma index criteria with very good agreement. Thus the use of Portal Dosimetry forpre-treatment patient QA is found to be a very useful, quick, precise, efficient and effective pre-treatment patient specific QA tool for VMAT treatment. Conclusion: Portal Dosimetry can be utilizedfor routine use for patient specific quality assurance for Volumetric Arc Radiotherapy treatment.


2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siji Cyriac ◽  
M. M. Musthafa ◽  
R. Ganapathi Raman ◽  
K. Abdul Haneefa ◽  
V. T. Hridya

Pretreatment quality assurance (QA) is a major concern in complex radiation therapy treatment plans like intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). Present study considers the variations in gamma index for gantry dependent pretreatment verification and commonly practiced zero gantry angle verifications for ten prostate IMRT plans using two commercial medical linear accelerators (Varian 2300 CD, Varian Clinac iX). Two verification plans (the one with all fields at the actual treatment angles and one with all fields merged to 0 degree gantry angles) for all the patients were generated to obtain dose fluence mapping using amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device (EPID). The gamma index was found depend on gantry angles but the difference between zero and the nonzero treatment angles is in the confidence level for clinical acceptance. The acceptance criteria of gamma method were always satisfied in both cases for two machines and are stable enough to execute the patient specific pretreatment quality assurance at 0 degree gantry angle for prostate IMRTs, where limited number of gantry angles are used.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document