Evaluation of Gamma Index Analysis for Detecting Errors in Patient-specific Quality Assurance in Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy.

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Health physics Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-06 DOI:10.1097/HP.0000000000001933
Taylan Tuğrul
{"title":"Evaluation of Gamma Index Analysis for Detecting Errors in Patient-specific Quality Assurance in Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy.","authors":"Taylan Tuğrul","doi":"10.1097/HP.0000000000001933","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Quality assurance practices performed before treatment are believed to identify various potential errors. In this study, 2-dimensional (2D) dosimetric results were analyzed by making some intentional mistakes in six different treatment plans. In this way, the detectability of errors was investigated. In all segments of all treatment plans, one of the multileaf collimators was kept fixed at different positions on the central axis. In addition to multileaf collimators error, gantry error was also examined in the study. The dose distribution results obtained by Treatment Planning System (TPS) were compared with those obtained by the 2D array device, both as local calculation and global calculation methods, using the gamma analysis method. When the results are examined in the case where the Multi-leaf collimators (MLC) is fixed at the 1 cm position, the gamma analysis pass rate of the other plans, except two plans in the MD criterion, are calculated above the 95% limit. When the dose distributions obtained as a result of irradiation with 0.5-degree erroneous gantry angle were analyzed, it was found that all plans were at an acceptable rate in the maximum dose criterion. In case of incorrect irradiation, dose reduction or overdose may occur in the irradiated target area, even if gamma analysis pass rates are sufficient. Quality control procedures performed before treatment may be less effective. It is suggested that it would be better to examine the gamma analysis criteria applied for error detection with different values and local calculation method, and that device-based quality controls should be performed frequently.</p>","PeriodicalId":12976,"journal":{"name":"Health physics","volume":"128 6","pages":"437-441"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health physics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0000000000001933","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Quality assurance practices performed before treatment are believed to identify various potential errors. In this study, 2-dimensional (2D) dosimetric results were analyzed by making some intentional mistakes in six different treatment plans. In this way, the detectability of errors was investigated. In all segments of all treatment plans, one of the multileaf collimators was kept fixed at different positions on the central axis. In addition to multileaf collimators error, gantry error was also examined in the study. The dose distribution results obtained by Treatment Planning System (TPS) were compared with those obtained by the 2D array device, both as local calculation and global calculation methods, using the gamma analysis method. When the results are examined in the case where the Multi-leaf collimators (MLC) is fixed at the 1 cm position, the gamma analysis pass rate of the other plans, except two plans in the MD criterion, are calculated above the 95% limit. When the dose distributions obtained as a result of irradiation with 0.5-degree erroneous gantry angle were analyzed, it was found that all plans were at an acceptable rate in the maximum dose criterion. In case of incorrect irradiation, dose reduction or overdose may occur in the irradiated target area, even if gamma analysis pass rates are sufficient. Quality control procedures performed before treatment may be less effective. It is suggested that it would be better to examine the gamma analysis criteria applied for error detection with different values and local calculation method, and that device-based quality controls should be performed frequently.

伽玛指数分析在调强放疗患者特异性质量保证中检测误差的评价。
摘要:在治疗前进行的质量保证实践被认为可以识别各种潜在的错误。在本研究中,通过在六种不同的治疗方案中犯一些故意错误来分析二维(2D)剂量学结果。通过这种方法,研究了误差的可检测性。在所有治疗方案的所有节段中,将其中一个多叶准直器固定在中心轴上的不同位置。除了多叶准直器误差外,还研究了龙门误差。将治疗计划系统(Treatment Planning System, TPS)获得的剂量分布结果与二维阵列装置获得的剂量分布结果进行局部计算和全局计算,采用伽玛分析法进行比较。当多叶准直器(MLC)固定在1cm位置时,除MD准则中的两个方案外,其他方案的伽玛分析通过率均在95%以上。当分析0.5度错误龙门角照射所得到的剂量分布时,发现所有方案在最大剂量标准中都处于可接受率。在不正确辐照的情况下,即使伽马分析通过率足够,也可能在辐照靶区发生剂量减少或过量。治疗前进行的质量控制程序可能效果较差。建议使用不同的数值和局部计算方法来检查用于错误检测的伽马分析准则,并应经常进行基于设备的质量控制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Health physics
Health physics 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
324
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Physics, first published in 1958, provides the latest research to a wide variety of radiation safety professionals including health physicists, nuclear chemists, medical physicists, and radiation safety officers with interests in nuclear and radiation science. The Journal allows professionals in these and other disciplines in science and engineering to stay on the cutting edge of scientific and technological advances in the field of radiation safety. The Journal publishes original papers, technical notes, articles on advances in practical applications, editorials, and correspondence. Journal articles report on the latest findings in theoretical, practical, and applied disciplines of epidemiology and radiation effects, radiation biology and radiation science, radiation ecology, and related fields.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信