Target localization accuracy in a respiratory phantom using BrainLAB ExacTrac and 4DCT imaging.

This study evaluated the accuracy of measuring the motion of an internal target using four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT) scanning and the BrainLAB ExacTrac X-ray imaging system. Displacements of a metal coil implanted in a commercial respiratory phantom were measured in each system and compared to the known motion. A commercial respiratory motion phantom containing a metal coil as a surrogate target was used. Phantom longitudinal motions were sinusoidal with a 4.0 second period and amplitudes ranging from 5-25 mm. We acquired 4DCT and ExacTrac images of the coil at specified respiratory phases and recorded the coordinates of the coil ends. Coil displacement relative to the 0% phase (full-inhale) position were computed for the ExacTrac and 4DCT imaging systems. Coil displacements were compared to known displacements based on the phantom's sinusoidal motion. Coil length distortion due to 4DCT phase binning was compared to the known physical length of the coil (31 mm). The maximum localization error for both coil endpoints for all motion settings was 3.5 mm for the 4DCT and 0.8 mm for the ExacTrac gating system. Coil length errors measured on the 4DCT were less than 0.8 mm at end inhale/exhale phases, but up to 8.3 mm at mid-inhalation phases at the largest motion amplitude (25 mm). Due to the fast image acquisition time (100 ms), no coil distortion was observable in the ExacTrac system. 4DCT showed problems imaging the coil during mid-respiratory phases of higher velocity (phases 20%-30% and 70%-80%) due to distortion caused by residual motion within the 4DCT phase bin. The ExacTrac imaging system was able to accurately localize the coil in the respiratory phantom over all phases of respiration. For our clinic, where end-respiration phases from 4DCT may be used for treatment planning calculations, the ExacTrac system is used to measure internal target motion. With the ExacTrac system, planning target size and motion uncertainties are minimized, potentially reducing internal target volume margins in gated radiotherapy.

Evaluation of a commercial flatbed document scanner and radiographic film scanner for radiochromic EBT film dosimetry.

The purpose of this study was to quantify the performance and assess the utility of two different types of scanners for radiochromic EBT film dosimetry: a commercial flatbed document scanner and a widely used radiographic film scanner. We evaluated the Epson Perfection V700 Photo flatbed scanner and the Vidar VXR Dosimetry Pro Advantage scanner as measurement devices for radiochromic EBT film. Measurements were made of scan orientation effects, response uniformity, and scanner noise. Scanners were tested using films irradiated with eight separate 3x3cm2 fields to doses ranging from 0.115-5.119 Gy. ImageJ and RIT software was used for analyzing the Epson and Vidar scans, respectively. For repeated scans of a single film, the measurements in each dose region were reproducible to within +/- 0.3% standard deviation (SD) with both scanners. Film-to-film variations for corresponding doses were measured to be within +/- 0.4% SD for both Epson scanner and Vidar scanners. Overall, the Epson scanner showed a 10% smaller range of pixel value compared to the Vidar scanner. Scanner noise was small: +/- 0.3% SD for the Epson and +/- 0.2% for the Vidar. Overall measurement uniformity for blank film in both systems was better than +/- 2%, provided that the leading and trailing 2 cm film edges were neglected in the Vidar system. In this region artifacts are attributed to the film rollers. Neither system demonstrated a clear measurement advantage. The Epson scanner is a relatively inexpensive method for analyzing radiochromic film, but there is a lack of commercially available software. For a clinic already using a Vidar scanner, applying it to radiochromic film is attractive because commercial software is available. However, care must be taken to avoid using the leading and trailing film edges.