• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.91-98
• /
• 2012

Verification of internal organ motion during treatment and its feedback is essential to accurate dose delivery to the moving target. We developed an offline based internal organ motion verification system (IMVS) using cine EPID images and evaluated its accuracy and availability through phantom study. For verification of organ motion using live cine EPID images, a pattern matching algorithm using an internal surrogate, which is very distinguishable and represents organ motion in the treatment field, like diaphragm, was employed in the self-developed analysis software. For the system performance test, we developed a linear motion phantom, which consists of a human body shaped phantom with a fake tumor in the lung, linear motion cart, and control software. The phantom was operated with a motion of 2 cm at 4 sec per cycle and cine EPID images were obtained at a rate of 3.3 and 6.6 frames per sec (2 MU/frame) with $1,024{\times}768$ pixel counts in a linear accelerator (10 MVX). Organ motion of the target was tracked using self-developed analysis software. Results were compared with planned data of the motion phantom and data from the video image based tracking system (RPM, Varian, USA) using an external surrogate in order to evaluate its accuracy. For quantitative analysis, we analyzed correlation between two data sets in terms of average cycle (peak to peak), amplitude, and pattern (RMS, root mean square) of motion. Averages for the cycle of motion from IMVS and RPM system were $3.98{\pm}0.11$ (IMVS 3.3 fps), $4.005{\pm}0.001$ (IMVS 6.6 fps), and $3.95{\pm}0.02$ (RPM), respectively, and showed good agreement on real value (4 sec/cycle). Average of the amplitude of motion tracked by our system showed $1.85{\pm}0.02$ cm (3.3 fps) and $1.94{\pm}0.02$ cm (6.6 fps) as showed a slightly different value, 0.15 (7.5% error) and 0.06 (3% error) cm, respectively, compared with the actual value (2 cm), due to time resolution for image acquisition. In analysis of pattern of motion, the value of the RMS from the cine EPID image in 3.3 fps (0.1044) grew slightly compared with data from 6.6 fps (0.0480). The organ motion verification system using sequential cine EPID images with an internal surrogate showed good representation of its motion within 3% error in a preliminary phantom study. The system can be implemented for clinical purposes, which include organ motion verification during treatment, compared with 4D treatment planning data, and its feedback for accurate dose delivery to the moving target.