• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.20 no.4
• /
• pp.324-330
• /
• 2009

In this study, we evaluated accuracy and usefulness of CyberKnife Respiratory Tracking System ($Synchrony^{TM}$, Accuray, USA) about a moving during stereotactic radiosurgery. For this study, we used moving phantom that can move the target. We also used Respiratory Tracking System called Synchrony of the Cyberknife in order to track the moving target. For treatment planning of the moving target, we obtained an image using 4D-CT. To measure dose distribution and point dose at the moving target, ion chamber (0.62 cc) and gafchromic EBT film were used. We compared dose distribution (80% isodose line of prescription dose) of static target to that of moving target in order to evaluate the accuracy of Respiratory Tracking System. We also measured the point dose at the target. The mean difference of synchronization for TLS (target localization system) and Synchrony were $11.5{\pm}3.09\;mm$ for desynchronization and $0.14{\pm}0.08\;mm$ for synchronization. The mean difference between static target plan and moving target plan using 4D CT images was $0.18{\pm}0.06\;mm$. And, the accuracy of Respiratory Tracking System was less 1 mm. Estimation of usefulness in Respiratory Tracking System was $17.39{\pm}0.14\;mm$ for inactivity and $1.37{\pm}0.11\;mm$ for activity. The mean difference of absolute dose was $0.68{\pm}0.38%$ in static target and $1.31{\pm}0.81%$ in moving target. As a conclusion, when we treat about the moving target, we consider that it is important to use 4D-CT and the Respiratory Tracking System. In this study, we confirmed the accuracy and usefulness of Respiratory Tracking System in the Cyberknife.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.8-15
• /
• 2018

This work reports the acceptance testing and commissioning experience of the Robotic Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) M6 system with a newly released $InCise^{TM}2$ Multileaf Collimator (MLC) installed at the Yonsei Cancer Center. Acceptance testing included a mechanical interdigitation test, leaf positional accuracy, leakage check, and End-to-End (E2E) tests. Beam data measurements included tissue-phantom ratios (TPRs), off-center ratios (OCRs), output factors collected at 11 field sizes (the smallest field size was $7.6mm{\times}7.7mm$ and largest field size was $115.0mm{\times}100.1mm$ at 800 mm source-to-axis distance), and open beam profiles. The beam model was verified by checking patient-specific quality assurance (QA) in four fiducial-inserted phantoms, using 10 intracranial and extracranial patient plans. All measurements for acceptance testing satisfied manufacturing specifications. Mean leaf position offsets using the Garden Fence test were found to be $0.01{\pm}0.06mm$ and $0.07{\pm}0.05mm$ for X1 and X2 leaf banks, respectively. Maximum and average leaf leakages were 0.20% and 0.18%, respectively. E2E tests for five tracking modes showed 0.26 mm (6D Skull), 0.3 mm (Fiducial), 0.26 mm (Xsight Spine), 0.62 mm (Xsight Lung), and 0.6 mm (Synchrony). TPRs, OCRs, output factors, and open beams measured under various conditions agreed with composite data provided from the manufacturer to within 2%. Patient-specific QA results were evaluated in two ways. Point dose measurements with an ion chamber were all within the 5% absolute-dose agreement, and relative-dose measurements using an array ion chamber detector all satisfied the 3%/3 mm gamma criterion for more than 90% of the measurement points. The Robotic IMRT M6 system equipped with the $InCise^{TM}2$ MLC was proven to be accurate and reliable.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.45 no.6
• /
• pp.491-502
• /
• 2022

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively investigate the upper and lower control limits of treatment planning parameters using EBT film based delivery quality assurance (DQA) results and to analyze the results of statistical process control (SPC) in helical tomotherapy (HT). A total of 152 patients who passed or failed DQA results were retrospectively included in this study. Prostate (n = 66), rectal (n = 51), and large-field cancer patients, including lymph nodes (n = 35), were randomly selected. The absolute point dose difference (DD) and global gamma passing rate (GPR) were analyzed for all patients. Control charts were used to evaluate the upper and lower control limits (UCL and LCL) for all the assessed treatment planning parameters. Treatment planning parameters such as gantry period, leaf open time (LOT), pitch, field width, actual and planning modulation factor, treatment time, couch speed, and couch travel were analyzed to provide the optimal range using the DQA results. The classification and regression tree (CART) was used to predict the relative importance of variables in the DQA results from various treatment planning parameters. We confirmed that the proportion of patients with an LOT below 100 ms in the failure group was relatively higher than that in the passing group. SPC can detect QA failure prior to over dosimetric QA tolerance levels. The acceptable tolerance range of each planning parameter may assist in the prediction of DQA failures using the SPC tool in the future.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.127-136
• /
• 2015

The purpose of this study is to perform a dosimetric evaluation of amplitude-based respiratory gating for the delivery of volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). We selected two types of breathing patterns, subjectively among patients with respiratory-gated treatment log files. For patients that showed consistent breathing patterns (CBP) relative to the 4D CT respiration patterns, the variability of the breath-holding position during treatment was observed within the thresholds. However, patients with inconsistent breathing patterns (IBP) show differences relative to those with CBP. The relative isodose distribution was evaluated using an EBT3 film by comparing gated delivery to static delivery, and an absolute dose measurement was performed with a $0.6cm^3$ Farmer-type ion chamber. The passing rate percentages under the 3%/3 mm gamma analysis for Patients 1, 2 and 3 were respectively 93.18%, 91.16%, and 95.46% for CBP, and 66.77%, 48.79%, and 40.36% for IBP. Under the more stringent criteria of 2%/2 mm, passing rates for Patients 1, 2 and 3 were respectively 73.05%, 67.14%, and 86.85% for CBP, and 46.53%, 32.73%, and 36.51% for IBP. The ion chamber measurements were within 3.5%, on average, of those calculated by the TPS and within 2.0%, on average, when compared to the static-point dose measurements for all cases of CBP. Inconsistent breathing patterns between 4D CT simulation and treatment may cause considerable dosimetric differences. Therefore, patient training is important to maintain consistent breathing amplitude during CT scan acquisition and treatment delivery.