RESUMO
Objective:To explore the clinical application of the electronic portal imaging device (EPID) based on the linear accelerator produced by Shanghai United Imaging Healthcare Co., Ltd. (UIH) to in vivo dose verification. Methods:A total of 68 patients (32 cases with head and neck tumors, 16 cases with chest tumors, and 20 cases with abdomen and pelvis tumors) who were treated with volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) in the Henan Provincial People′s Hospital were selected in this study. Each patient underwent the pre-treatment dose verification using an Arccheck device (Pre Arccheck), the pre-treatment dose verification using an EPID (Pre EPID), and the in vivo dose verification using an EPID (In vivo EPID). Moreover, the position verification based on fan beam computed tomography (FBCT) was also performed for each patient in the first three treatments and then once a week. The patients were treated when the setup error in any direction ( x: left-right, y: head-foot, z: vertical) was less than 3 mm; otherwise, position correction would be conducted. The three-dimensional setup deviation d was calculated according to setup errors x, y, and z. Results:The γ passing rates of dose verifications Pre EPID and In vivo EPID of 68 patients were (99.97±0.1)% and (94.15±3.84)%, respectively, significantly different from that (98.86±1.48)% of the Pre Arccheck dose verification ( t = -6.12, 9.43; P < 0.05). The γ passing rates of the chest, abdomen and pelvis, and head and neck in the In vivo EPID dose verification showed no significant differences ( P > 0.05). The difference in the γ passing rates (5.56±3.72)% between dose verifications Pre EPID and first In vivo EPID was unrelated to the three-dimensional setup deviation d (1.46±1.51 mm) ( P > 0.05). As the treatment proceeded, the γ passing rate of In vivo EPID gradually decreased from (94.15±3.84)% in the first week to (92.15±3.24)% in the fifth week. From the third week to the fifth week, the γ passing rates of In vivo EPID were significantly different from those in the first week ( t = 2.48, 2.75, 3.09, P < 0.05). Conclusions:The setup errors within 3 mm do not affect the γ passing rate of in vivo dose verification. The clinically acceptable threshold for the γ passing rate of in vivo EPID needs to be further determined. In addition, in vivo dose verification can support the clinical application of adaptive radiotherapy to a certain extent.
RESUMO
Objective:To validate the accuracy of physical model of in-vivo 3D dose verification based on electronic portal imaging device (EPID) using the phantom and preliminarily analyze the clinical application.Methods:Two phantoms (uniform and non-uniform phantoms) were involved in this study. The system of in-vivo 3D dose verification based on EPID was employed to acquire the images of square fields (SF) and combined fields of intensity-modulated radiotherapy (CFIMRT). The physical model of different media was constructed using the system. The factor of γ passing rate under different dose/distance criteria was statistically compared. For clinical cases, the dose-volume histograms were adopted to analyze the dose distribution of target volume and organs at risk (OARs).Results:For the SF in the uniform phantom, the average γ passing rate (3%/3 mm) was (97.49±1.11)%, and (94.06±5.11)% for the SF in the non-uniform phantom ( P>0.05). No statistical significance was noted in IMRT using different delivery methods (all P>0.05). For clinical cases, the average γ passing rate (3%/2 mm) was (97.96±1.84)% in the pre-treatment dose verification, and (90.51±6.96)%(3%/3 mm) for the in-vivo 3D dose verification. For clinical cases, significant dose deviation was observed in OARs with small size and large volume changes. Conclusion:The in-vivo 3D dose verification model based on EPID can be effectively applied in inter-fraction dose verification, providing technical support for adaptive radiotherapy in clinical practice.