• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Medical Physics Conference
• /
• 2006.08a
• /
• pp.62-62
• /
• 2006

• Journal of the Korean Society of Radiology
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.9-17
• /
• 2017

A high degree of precision and accuracy in Gamma Knife Radiosurgery(GKRS) is a fundamental requirement for therapeutical success. Elaborate radiation delivery and dose gradients with the steep fall-off of radiation are clinically applied thus necessitating a dedicated Quality Assurance(QA) program in order to guarantee dosimetric and geometric accuracy and reduce all the risk factors that can occur in GKRS. In this study, as a part of QA we verified the accuracy of single-shot dose profiles used in the algorithm of Gamma Knife Perfexion(PFX) treatment planning system employing Variable Ellipsoid Modeling Technique(VEMT). We evaluated the dose distributions of single-shots in a spherical ABC phantom with diameter 160 mm on Gamma Knife PFX. The single-shots were directed to the center of ABC phantom. Collimating configurations of 4, 8, and 16 mm sizes along x, y, and z axes were studied. Gamma Knife PFX treatment planning system being used in GKRS is called Leksell GammaPlan(LGP) ver 10.1.1. From the verification like this, the accuracy of GKRS will be doubled. Then the clinical application must be finally performed based on precision and accuracy of GKRS. Specifically the width at the 50% isodose level, that is, Full-Width-of-Half-Maximum(FWHM) was verified under such conditions that a patient's head is simulated as a sphere with diameter 160mm. All the data about dose profiles along x, y, and z axes predicted through VEMT were excellently consistent with dose profiles from LGP within specifications(${\leq}1mm$ at 50% isodose level) except for a little difference of FWHM and PENUMBRA(isodose level: 20%~80%) along z axis for 4 mm and 8mm collimating configurations. The maximum discrepancy of FWHM was less than 2.3% at all collimating configurations. The maximum discrepancy of PENUMBRA was given for the 8 mm collimator along z axis. The difference of FWHM and PENUMBRA in the dose distributions obtained with VEMT and LGP is too small to give the clinical significance in GKRS. The results of this study are considered as a reference for medical physicists involved in GKRS in the whole world. Therefore we can work to confirm the validity of dose distributions for all collimating configurations determined through the regular preventative maintenance program using the independent verification method VEMT for the results of LGP and clinically assure the perfect treatment for patients of GKRS. Thus the use of VEMT is expected that it will be a part of QA that can verify and operate the system safely.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.9 no.11
• /
• pp.254-261
• /
• 2009

This study suggested that the table of CT-simulator and the laser alignment system using diagnostic CT scanner have an efficient method for improvement in alignment between the planned target center of traverse image with CT scanner. It was conducted on the daily QA when presented in the AAPM TG66 with correcting the laser alignment system using geometric trigonometric functions and investigated the effectiveness of correction methods as compared with those before and after correction. Before correction error was 3.82mm between the planned target center of image, the table longitudinal axis was twisted with 0.436o. The laser alignment system using geometric trigonometric functions in after correction was satisfied with tolerance limits of ${\pm}2mm$ when occurred about 0.7mm in errors between the planned target center. The table correction to satisfy the geometric accuracy is very inefficient over against the time and economic loss as well as technical limits in the case of application as only radiation therapy associated with CT-simulator with diagnostic CT scanner in use. But, the method which corrects the laser alignment system is economic and relatively simple with possibility of getting well geometric accuracy and we suppose that it is efficient method for applying in the clinic.

• Korean Journal of Digital Imaging in Medicine
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.21-28
• /
• 2008

Diagnostic display monitor QA according to AAPM TG18 is usually performed by PACS administrator, product manager and reading doctor, and for acceptance testing and periodic quality control evaluation, a combination of visual and quantitative tests can be used, as outlined in sections 5 and 6 of 'assessment of display performance for medical imaging systems'. Although many display tests can be performed visually, a more objective and quantitative evaluation of display performance requires special test tools. The required instruments vary in their complexity and cost, depending on the context of the evaluation(research, acceptance testing, or quality control) and how thorough the evaluation needs to be. Objective and reliable assessment of many display characteristics can be performed with relatively inexpensive equipment, So, we made 'AAPM TG18 guiding instrument' to ues variable purpose of the evaluation of 'geometrical distortions(quantitative"', 'veiling glare(visual)' and 'sensor calibration'. The spatial measurements for the quantitative evaluation of geometric distortions, and the measurement of the veling-glare ring response function which provides information regarding the spatial extent of the luminance spread, can be performed using the TG18 guiding instrument can be used to sensor calibration to standardize the basic rate of 0% luminance when periodic calibration.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.32
• /
• pp.93-109
• /
• 2020

Purpose: The radiochromic film (Gafchromic EBT3, Ashland Advanced Materials, USA) and 3-dimensional analysis system dosimetry checkTM (DC, MathResolutions, USA) were evaluated for patient-specific quality assurance (QA) of helical tomotherapy. Materials and Methods: Depending on the tumors' positions, three types of targets, which are the abdominal tumor (130.6㎤), retroperitoneal tumor (849.0㎤), and the whole abdominal metastasis tumor (3131.0㎤) applied to the humanoid phantom (Anderson Rando Phantom, USA). We established a total of 12 comparative treatment plans by the four geometric conditions of the beam irradiation, which are the different field widths (FW) of 2.5-cm, 5.0-cm, and pitches of 0.287, 0.43. Ionization measurements (1D) with EBT3 by inserting the cheese phantom (2D) were compared to DC measurements of the 3D dose reconstruction on CT images from beam fluence log information. For the clinical feasibility evaluation of the DC, dose reconstruction has been performed using the same cheese phantom with the EBT3 method. Recalculated dose distributions revealed the dose error information during the actual irradiation on the same CT images quantitatively compared to the treatment plan. The Thread effect, which might appear in the Helical Tomotherapy, was analyzed by ripple amplitude (%). We also performed gamma index analysis (DD: 3mm/ DTA: 3%, pass threshold limit: 95%) for pattern check of the dose distribution. Results: Ripple amplitude measurement resulted in the highest average of 23.1% in the peritoneum tumor. In the radiochromic film analysis, the absolute dose was on average 0.9±0.4%, and gamma index analysis was on average 96.4±2.2% (Passing rate: >95%), which could be limited to the large target sizes such as the whole abdominal metastasis tumor. In the DC analysis with the humanoid phantom for FW of 5.0-cm, the three regions' average was 91.8±6.4% in the 2D and 3D plan. The three planes (axial, coronal, and sagittal) and dose profile could be analyzed with the entire peritoneum tumor and the whole abdominal metastasis target, with planned dose distributions. The dose errors based on the dose-volume histogram in the DC evaluations increased depending on FW and pitch. Conclusion: The DC method could implement a dose error analysis on the 3D patient image data by the measured beam fluence log information only without any dosimetry tools for patient-specific quality assurance. Also, there may be no limit to apply for the tumor location and size; therefore, the DC could be useful in patient-specific QAl during the treatment of Helical Tomotherapy of large and irregular tumors.