Investigation of Error Detection Capabilities of Various Patient-Specific Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Quality Assurance Devices

T. Sanghangthum, S. Z. Lat, S. Suriyapee
{"title":"Investigation of Error Detection Capabilities of Various Patient-Specific Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Quality Assurance Devices","authors":"T. Sanghangthum, S. Z. Lat, S. Suriyapee","doi":"10.4236/IJMPCERO.2019.81003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The capability of error detection of patient-specific QA tools plays an important role in verifying MLC motion accuracy. The goal of this study was to investigate the capability in error detection of portal dosimetry, MapCHECK2 and MatriXX QA tools in IMRT plans. The 9 fields IMRT for 4 head and neck plans and 7 fields IMRT for 4 prostate plans were selected for the error detection of QA devices. The measurements were undertaken for the original plan and the modified plans, where the known errors were introduced for increasing and decreasing of prescribed dose (±2%, ±4% and ±6%) and position shifted in X-axis and Y-axis (±1, ±2, ±3 and ±5 mm). After measurement, the results were compared between calculated and measured values using gamma analysis at 3%/3 mm criteria. The average gamma pass for no errors introduced in head and neck plans was 96.9%, 98.6%, and 98.8%, while prostate plans presented 99.4%, 99.0%, and 99.7%, for portal dosimetry, MapCHECK2 and MatriXX system, respectively. In head and neck plan, the shifted error detections were 1 mm for portal dosimetry, 2 mm for MapCHECK2, and 3 mm for MatriXX system. In prostate plan, the shifted error detections were 2 mm for portal dosimetry, 3 mm for MapCHECK2, and 5 mm for MatriXX system. For the dose error detection, the portal dosimetry system could detect at 2% dose deviation in head and neck and 4% in prostate plans, while other two devices could detect at 4% dose deviation in both head and neck and prostate plans. Portal dosimetry shows slightly more capability to detect the error compared with MapCHECK2 and MatriXX system, especially in the complicated plan. It may be due to higher resolution of the detector; however, all three-detector types can detect various errors and can be used for patient-specific IMRT QA.","PeriodicalId":14028,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Medical Physics, Clinical Engineering and Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/IJMPCERO.2019.81003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The capability of error detection of patient-specific QA tools plays an important role in verifying MLC motion accuracy. The goal of this study was to investigate the capability in error detection of portal dosimetry, MapCHECK2 and MatriXX QA tools in IMRT plans. The 9 fields IMRT for 4 head and neck plans and 7 fields IMRT for 4 prostate plans were selected for the error detection of QA devices. The measurements were undertaken for the original plan and the modified plans, where the known errors were introduced for increasing and decreasing of prescribed dose (±2%, ±4% and ±6%) and position shifted in X-axis and Y-axis (±1, ±2, ±3 and ±5 mm). After measurement, the results were compared between calculated and measured values using gamma analysis at 3%/3 mm criteria. The average gamma pass for no errors introduced in head and neck plans was 96.9%, 98.6%, and 98.8%, while prostate plans presented 99.4%, 99.0%, and 99.7%, for portal dosimetry, MapCHECK2 and MatriXX system, respectively. In head and neck plan, the shifted error detections were 1 mm for portal dosimetry, 2 mm for MapCHECK2, and 3 mm for MatriXX system. In prostate plan, the shifted error detections were 2 mm for portal dosimetry, 3 mm for MapCHECK2, and 5 mm for MatriXX system. For the dose error detection, the portal dosimetry system could detect at 2% dose deviation in head and neck and 4% in prostate plans, while other two devices could detect at 4% dose deviation in both head and neck and prostate plans. Portal dosimetry shows slightly more capability to detect the error compared with MapCHECK2 and MatriXX system, especially in the complicated plan. It may be due to higher resolution of the detector; however, all three-detector types can detect various errors and can be used for patient-specific IMRT QA.
各种患者特异性调强放疗质量保证装置的错误检测能力研究
针对患者的QA工具的错误检测能力在验证MLC运动精度方面起着重要的作用。本研究的目的是研究门静脉剂量学、MapCHECK2和MatriXX QA工具在IMRT计划中的错误检测能力。选取4个头颈部计划的9场IMRT和4个前列腺计划的7场IMRT用于QA设备的错误检测。对原方案和修改方案进行测量,其中引入了规定剂量增减(±2%,±4%和±6%)和x轴和y轴位置位移(±1,±2,±3和±5 mm)的已知误差。测量后,使用3%/ 3mm标准的伽玛分析将计算值与实测值进行比较。头颈部计划中无错误引入的平均伽马通过率分别为96.9%、98.6%和98.8%,而前列腺计划中门静脉剂量学、MapCHECK2和MatriXX系统的平均伽马通过率分别为99.4%、99.0%和99.7%。在头颈部计划中,门脉剂量法的偏移误差检测为1mm, MapCHECK2为2mm, MatriXX系统为3mm。在前列腺计划中,门脉剂量法的误差偏移为2mm, MapCHECK2为3mm, MatriXX系统为5mm。在剂量误差检测方面,门静脉剂量测定系统头颈部剂量偏差为2%,前列腺剂量偏差为4%,另外两种装置头颈部和前列腺剂量偏差均为4%。与MapCHECK2和MatriXX系统相比,Portal剂量法检测误差的能力略强,特别是在复杂的方案中。这可能是由于检测器的分辨率更高;然而,所有三种检测器类型都可以检测到各种错误,并可用于患者特异性IMRT QA。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信