Evaluation of commercial devices for patient specific QA of stereotactic radiotherapy plans.
diodes
electronic portal imaging device
quality assurance
radiochromic film
stereotactic body radiation therapy
stereotactic radiosurgery
Journal
Journal of applied clinical medical physics
ISSN: 1526-9914
Titre abrégé: J Appl Clin Med Phys
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101089176
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Aug 2023
Aug 2023
Historique:
revised:
22
02
2023
received:
13
10
2022
accepted:
20
03
2023
medline:
7
8
2023
pubmed:
9
5
2023
entrez:
9
5
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT) methods have become common for the treatment of small tumors in various parts of the body. Small field dosimetry has a unique set of challenges when it comes to the pre-treatment validation of a radiotherapy plan that involves film dosimetry or high-resolution detectors. Comparison of commercial quality assurance (QA) devices to the film dosimetry method for pre-treatment evaluation of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), fractionated SRT, and stereotactic body radiation therapy treatment plans have been evaluated in this study. Forty stereotactic QA plans were measured using EBT-XD film, IBA Matrixx Resolution, SNC ArcCHECK, Varian aS1200 EPID, SNC SRS MapCHECK, and IBA myQA SRS. The results of the commercial devices are compared to the EBT-XD film dosimetry results for each gamma criteria. Treatment plan characteristics such as modulation factor and target volume were investigated for correlation with the passing rates. It was found that all detectors have greater than 95% passing rates at 3%/3 mm. Passing rates decrease rapidly for ArcCHECK and the Matrixx as criteria became more strict. In contrast, EBT-XD film, SNC SRS MapCHECK, and IBA myQA SRS passing rates do not decline as rapidly when compared to Matrix Resolution, ArcCHECK, and the EPID. EBT-XD film, SNC SRS MapCHECK, and IBA myQA SRS maintain greater than 90% passing rate at 2%/1 mm and greater than 80% at 1%/1 mm. Additionally, the ability of these devices to detect changes in dose distribution due to MLC positioning errors was investigated. Ten VMAT SBRT/SRS treatment plans were created with 6 MV FFF or 10 MV FFF beam energies using Eclipse 15.6. A MATLAB script was used to create two MLC positioning error scenarios from the original treatment plan. It was found that errors in MLC positioning were most reliably detected at 2%/1 mm for high-resolution detectors and that lower-resolution detectors did not consistently detect MLC positioning errors.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37158727
doi: 10.1002/acm2.14009
pmc: PMC10402672
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e14009Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine.
Références
Phys Med Biol. 2018 Aug 20;63(16):165013
pubmed: 30051879
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019 Oct;20(10):13-23
pubmed: 31478343
Biomed Res Int. 2013;2013:362761
pubmed: 24490157
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1983 Sep;46(9):797-803
pubmed: 6352865
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017 Sep;18(5):10-21
pubmed: 28786239
Med Phys. 1998 Nov;25(11):2093-115
pubmed: 9829234
Neurosurgery. 1995 Feb;36(2):311-9
pubmed: 7731511
Am J Clin Oncol. 2007 Dec;30(6):637-44
pubmed: 18091059
J Neurooncol. 2021 Feb;151(3):451-459
pubmed: 33611711
Med Phys. 2006 Dec;33(12):4551-6
pubmed: 17278806
J Radiosurg SBRT. 2020;7(2):135-147
pubmed: 33282467
Appl Neurophysiol. 1985;48(1-6):133-45
pubmed: 3915642
Neurosurgery. 1988 Mar;22(3):454-64
pubmed: 3129667
Med Phys. 2016 Feb;43(2):643-9
pubmed: 26843228
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2023 Aug;24(8):e14009
pubmed: 37158727
Neurosurgery. 1985 Feb;16(2):154-60
pubmed: 3883221
J Med Signals Sens. 2018 Jul-Sep;8(3):195-203
pubmed: 30181968
Med Phys. 2020 Dec;47(12):5986-6025
pubmed: 32990328