Evaluation of a high resolution diode array for CyberKnife quality assurance.
CyberKnife
diode array
quality assurance
radiochromic film
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:
Sep 2023
Sep 2023
Historique:
revised:
22
03
2023
received:
24
11
2022
accepted:
01
05
2023
medline:
6
9
2023
pubmed:
29
5
2023
entrez:
29
5
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The CyberKnife quality assurance (QA) program relies mainly on the use of radiochromic film (RCF). We aimed at evaluating high-resolution arrays of detectors as an alternative to films for CyberKnife machine QA. This study will test the SRS Mapcheck (Sun Nuclear, Melbourne, Florida, USA) diode array and its own software, which allows three tests of the CyberKnife QA program to be performed. The first one is a geometrical accuracy test based on the delivery of two orthogonal beams (Automated Quality Assurance, AQA). Besides comparing the constancy and repeatability of both methods, known errors will be introduced to check their sensitivity. The second checks the constancy of the iris collimator field sizes (Iris QA). Changes in the field sizes will be introduced to study the array sensitivity. The last test checks the correct positioning of the multileaf collimator (MLC). It will be tested introducing known systematic displacements to whole banks and to single leaves. The results of the RCF and diode array were equivalent (maximum differences of 0.18 ± 0.14 mm) for the AQA test, showing the array a higher reproducibility. When known errors were introduced, both methods behaved linearly with similar slopes. Regarding Iris QA, the array measurements are highly linear when changes in the field sizes are introduced. Linear regressions show slopes of 0.96-1.17 with r The diode array is sensitive and accurate in the AQA and Iris QA tests, which give us the possibility of substituting RCF with a diode array. QA would be performed faster than using the film procedure, obtaining reliable results. Regarding the MLC QA, the inability to detect systematic displacements make it difficult to confidently use the detector.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37247259
doi: 10.1002/acm2.14053
pmc: PMC10476977
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e14053Informations 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
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2021 Oct;22(10):104-119
pubmed: 34449110
Br J Radiol. 2021 Jul 01;94(1123):20210473
pubmed: 34111967
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022 May;23(5):e13569
pubmed: 35278033
Phys Med Biol. 2009 Sep 21;54(18):5359-80
pubmed: 19687567
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2023 Sep;24(9):e14053
pubmed: 37247259
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1988 Feb;14(2):373-81
pubmed: 3276655
Med Phys. 2011 Jun;38(6):2914-36
pubmed: 21815366
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2022 Aug;23(8):e13645
pubmed: 35789532
Med Phys. 2016 May;43(5):2063
pubmed: 27147318
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2018 Mar;19(2):29-34
pubmed: 29377476
Technol Cancer Res Treat. 2010 Oct;9(5):433-52
pubmed: 20815415
Med Phys. 2020 Jul;47(7):3153-3164
pubmed: 32215929
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2019 Oct;20(10):13-23
pubmed: 31478343
Med Phys. 2003 May;30(5):743-50
pubmed: 12772980