ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This work proposes a comparative evaluation of two of our patient-specific quality assurance processes involving ArcCHECK® (Sun Nuclear) and Gafchromic® EBT3 films (Ashland) in order to determine which detector is able to most effectively detect an anomaly in a deliberately biased tomotherapy plan. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A complex clinical head and neck tomotherapy plan was deliberately biased by introducing six errors: multileaf collimator leaf positional errors by leaving one and two central leafs closed during the whole treatment, initial radiation angle errors (+0.5° and +1.0°) and multileaf collimator leafs opening time errors (+0.5% and +1.0%). For each error-induced plan, comparison of ArcCHECK® with Gafchromic® EBT3 films (20.3×25.4cm2) was performed through two methods: a dose matrices subtraction study and a gamma index analysis. RESULTS: The dose matrices subtraction study shows that our ArcCHECK® processing is able to detect all the six induced errors contrary to the one using films, which are only able to detect the two biases involving multileaf collimator leaf positional errors. The gamma index analysis confirms the previous method, since it shows all six errors induced in the reference plan seem to be widely detected with ArcCHECK® with the more restrictive 1%/1mm gamma criterion, whereas films may only be able to detect biases in relation to multileaf collimator leaf positional errors. It also shows the common 3%/3mm gamma criterion does not allow deciding between both detectors in the detection of the six induced biases. CONCLUSION: Both comparative methods showed ArcCHECK® processing is more suitable to detect the six errors introduced in the reference treatment plan.
Subject(s)
Quality Assurance, Health Care , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated/standards , Humans , Medical Errors , SoftwareABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This work proposes an evaluation of the Elekta XVI(®) kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography imaging system. The average dose delivered for each acquisition protocol proposed by default by the manufacturer was measured with several detectors and compared to theoretical dose values given by Elekta. At the same time, an evaluation of image quality for pelvic protocols correlated to dose measurements in homogeneous and heterogeneous mediums allowed to optimize the use of the XVI(®) system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The dose was measured for each acquisition protocol (varying filters, FOV and collimations) with four detectors (CT pencil ion chamber, 0.3 and 0.125 cm(3) cylindrical ion chambers, radiothermoluminescent dosimeters) in a CTDI phantom. The dose evaluation in a heterogeneous medium was performed in an experimental anthropomorphic phantom simulating a male pelvis. Image quality was assessed with a Catphan(®) 600 phantom. RESULTS: The average dose measured in a homogeneous medium was about 17 mGy and 25 mGy per acquisition for Pelvis and Prostate protocols and about 17 mGy and 1 mGy for Lung and Head protocols. The study performed with different detectors showed that doses obtained were of the same order of magnitude (± 10 %) and agreed with those supplied by the manufacturer. The evaluation of image quality correlated to the average dose measured allowed to optimize the use of XVI(®) acquisition protocols. Measurement results in a heterogeneous medium showed a dose decrease by a factor 1.5 for bone and by a factor 2 for titanium. CONCLUSION: The study showed that theoretical values proposed by the manufacturer could be used to estimate the average dose delivered to the patient by the kV-CBCT imaging system. The analysis of all the results led to the implementation of a procedure allowing to optimize and account for the dose delivered to the patient by the CBCT imaging system and to report it in the patient folder.
