• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.28 no.3
• /
• pp.129-133
• /
• 2017

The machine log files recorded by a scanning control unit in proton beam therapy system have been studied to be used as a quality assurance method of scanning beam deliveries. The accuracy of the data in the log files have been evaluated with a standard calibration beam scan pattern. The proton beam scan pattern has been delivered on a gafchromic film located at the isocenter plane of the proton beam treatment nozzle and found to agree within ${\pm}1.0mm$. The machine data accumulated for the scanning beam proton therapy of five different cases have been analyzed using a statistical method to estimate any systematic error in the data. The high-precision scanning beam log files in line scanning proton therapy system have been validated to be used for off-line scanning beam monitoring and thus as a patient-specific quality assurance method. The use of the machine log files for patient-specific quality assurance would simplify the quality assurance procedure with accurate scanning beam data.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.107-115
• /
• 2021

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical quality assurance results of portal dosimetry using an electronic portal imaging device, a method that is extensively used for patient-specific quality assurance, and the newly released Mobius3D for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Methods: This retrospective study includes data from 122 patients who underwent IMRT and VMAT on the Novalis Tx and VitalBeam linear accelerators between April and June 2020. We used a paired t-test to compare portal dosimetry using an electronic portal imaging device and the average gamma passing rates of MobiusFX using log files regenerated after patient treatment. Results: The average gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) and MobiusFX (5%/3 mm) were 99.43%±1.02% and 99.32%±1.87% in VitalBeam and 97.53%±3.34% and 96.45%±13.94% in Novalis Tx, respectively. Comparison of the gamma passing rate results of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) and MobiusFX (5%/3 mm as per the manufacturer's manual) does not show any statistically significant difference. Conclusions: Log file-based patient-specific quality assurance, including independent dose calculation, can be appropriately used in clinical practice as a second-check dosimetry, and it is considered comparable with primary quality assurance such as portal dosimetry.

• Journal of Yeungnam Medical Science
• /
• v.39 no.2
• /
• pp.108-115
• /
• 2022

Background: This study was aimed at comparing and analyzing the results of FractionLab (Varian/Mobius Medical System) with those of portal dosimetry that uses an electronic portal imaging device. Portal dosimetry is extensively used for patient-specific quality assurance (QA) in intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT). Methods: The study includes 29 patients who underwent IMRT on a Novalis-Tx linear accelerator (Varian Medical System and Brain-LAB) between June 2019 and March 2021. We analyzed the multileaf collimator DynaLog files generated after portal dosimetry to evaluate the same condition using FractionLab. The results of the recently launched FractionLab at various gamma indices (0.1%/0.1 mm-1%/1 mm) are analyzed and compared with those of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm). Results: The average gamma passing rates of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) and FractionLab are 98.1% (95.5%-100%) and 97.5% (92.3%-99.7%) at 0.6%/0.6 mm, respectively. The results of portal dosimetry (3%/3 mm) are statistically comparable with the QA results of FractionLab (0.6%/0.6 mm-0.9%/0.9 mm). Conclusion: This paper presents the clinical performance of FractionLab by the comparison of the QA results of FractionLab using portal dosimetry with various gamma indexes when performing patient-specific QA in IMRT treatment. Further, the appropriate gamma index when performing patient-specific QA with FractionLab is provided.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.41 no.1
• /
• pp.39-45
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the usefulness of a software-based quality assurance system based on Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy treatment plan. Evaluate treatment plan through the D VH analysis, PTV mean dose ($D_{mean}$) and PTV 95% dose($D_{95}$) compare the MFX based on original treatment plan, Average error rate was $0.9{\pm}0.6%$, $1.0{\pm}0.8%$, respectively. Measuring point dose using phantom and ion chamber, the average error rate between the ionization chamber and MFX was $0.9{\pm}0.7%$, $1.1{\pm}0.7%$ (high dose region), $1.1{\pm}0.9%$, $1.2{\pm}0.7%$ (low dose region). The average gamma though of MFX and $Delta^{4PT}$ is $98.7{\pm}1.2%$, $98.4{\pm}.3%$, respectively. Through this study, A software based QA system that simplifies hardware based QA procedures that involve a lot of time and effort. It can be used as a simple and useful tool in clinical practice.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.46 no.3
• /
• pp.231-238
• /
• 2023

This study aimed to compare the results of delivery quality assurance (DQA) using MapCHECK and OCTAVIUS for radiation therapy. Thirty patients who passed the DQA results were retrospectively included in this study. The point dose difference (DD) and gamma passing rate (GPR) were analyzed to evaluate the agreement between the measured and planned data for all cases, Plan complexity was evaluated to analyze dosimetric accuracy by quantifying the degree of modulation according to each plan. We analyzed the monitor units (MUs) and total MUs for each plan to evaluate the correlation between the MUs and plan complexity. We used a paired t-test to compare the DD and GPRs that were obtained using the two devices. The DDs and GPRs were within the tolerance range for all cases. The average GPRs difference between the two devices was statistically significant for the brain, and head and neck for gamma criteria of 3%/3 mm and 2%/2 mm. There was no significant correlation between the modulation index and total MUs for any of the cases. These DQA devices can be used interchangeably for routine patient-specific QA in radiation therapy.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.52 no.3
• /
• pp.153-163
• /
• 2014

3-dimensional information for anatomic stucture plays a role as integral part in clinical aspect of dental practice. CBCT(cone beam computed tomography) has been accepted as useful diagnostic tool offering Volume data and images for evaluating teeth and jaws in lower radiation dose than conventional CT. CBCT equipment is essential for the quality assurance of it to ensure continued satisfactory performance and result of adequate images. Dental practitioner and oral and maxillofacial radiologist should have a responsibility and critical thinking to deliver this technology to patients in a responsible way, so that diaganostic value is maximised and radiation doses kept as low as resonably achievable. CBCT imaging modality should be used only after a review of the patient's health and imaging history and the completion of a thorough clinical examination. Clinical guidelines are systematically developed statements to assist practitioner and patient decisions about appropriate health care for specific clinical circumstances Dental practitioners should prescribe CBCT imaging only when they expect that the diagnostic yield will benefit patient care, enhance patient safety or improve clinical outcomes significantly. Knowledge of patient dose is essential for clinicians who are making the decision regarding the justification of the exposure. There are some limitation in the measurement of patient dose in CBCT for the approval and adaptation of conventinal methodolgy in CT. It is also important to ensure that doses are optimised and in line with any national and international guidelines. The higher radiation doses of CBCT compared with conventional radiography, mean that high standards must be maintained. The Quality Assurance(QA) programme should entail surveys and checks that are performed according to a regular timetable. QA programme should be maintained by staff to ensure adherence to the programme and to raise its importance among staff.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.53-58
• /
• 2018

This paper evaluates patient-specific quality assurance (PSQA) in the treatment of small and multiple tumors by the CyberKnife system with fixed collimators, using an ion chamber and EBT3 films. We selected 49 patients with single or multiple brain tumors, and the treatment plans include one to four targets with total volumes ranging from 0.12 cc to 3.74 cc. All PSQA deliveries were performed with a stereotactic dose verification phantom. The A16 microchamber (Standard Imaging, WI, USA) and Gafchromic EBT3 film (Ashland ISP Advanced Materials, NJ, USA) were inserted into the phantom to measure the point dose of the target and the dose distribution, respectively. The film was scanned 1 hr after irradiation by a film digitizer scanner and analyzed using RIT software (Radiological Imaging Technology, CO, USA). The acceptance criteria was <5% for the point dose measurement and >90% gamma passing rate using 3%/3 mm and relative dose difference, respectively. The point dose errors between the calculated and measured dose by the ion chamber were in the range of -17.5% to 8.03%. The mean point dose differences for 5 mm, 7.5 mm, and 10 mm fixed cone size was -11.1%, -4.1%, and -1.5%, respectively. The mean gamma passing rates for all cases was 96.1%. Although the maximum dose distribution of multiple targets was not shown in the film, gamma distribution showed that dose verification for multiple tumors can be performed. The use of the microchamber and EBT3 film made it possible to verify the dosimetric and mechanical accuracy of small and multiple targets. In particular, the correction factors should be applied to small fixed collimators less than 10 mm.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.19 no.1
• /
• pp.35-41
• /
• 2008

The main benefit of proton therapy over photon beam radiotherapy is the absence of exit dose, which offers the opportunity for highly conformal dose distributions to target volume while simultaneously irradiating less normal tissue. For proton beam therapy two patient specific beam modifying devices are used. The aperture is used to shape the transverse extension of the proton beam to the shape of the tumor target and a patient-specific compensator attached to the block aperture when required and used to modify the beam range as required by the treatment plan for the patient. A block of range shifting material, shaped on one face in such a way that the distal end of the proton field in the patient takes the shape of the distal end of the target volume. The mechanical quality assurance of range compensator is an essential procedure to confirm the 3 dimensional patient-specific dose distributions. We proposed a new quality assurance method for range compensator based on image processing using X-ray tube of proton therapy treatment room. The depth information, boundaries of each depth of plan compensatorfile and x-ray image of compensator were analyzed and presented over 80% matching results with proposed QA program.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.120-127
• /
• 2019

Purpose: This study was designed to evaluate the dosimetric performance of Mobius3D by comparison with an aSi-based electronic portal imaging device (EPID) and Octavius 4D, which are conventionally used for patient-specific prescription dose verification. Methods: The study was conducted using nine patients who were treated by volumetric modulated arc therapy. To evaluate the feasibility of Mobius3D for prescription dose verification, we compared the QA results of Mobius3D to an aSi-based EPID and the Octavius 4D dose verification methods. The first was the comparison of the Mobius3D verification phantom dose, and the second was to gamma index analysis. Results: The percentage differences between the calculated point dose and measurements from a PTW31010 ion chamber were 1.6%±1.3%, 2.0%±0.8%, and 1.2%±1.2%, using collapsed cone convolution, an analytical anisotropic algorithm, and the AcurosXB algorithm respectively. The average difference was found to be 1.6%±0.3%. Additionally, in the case of using the PTW31014 ion chamber, the corresponding results were 2.0%±1.4%, 2.4%±2.1%, and 1.6%±2.5%, showing an average agreement within 2.0%±0.3%. Considering all the criteria, the Mobius3D result showed that the percentage dose difference from the EPID was within 0.46%±0.34% on average, and the percentage dose difference from Octavius 4D was within 3.14%±2.85% on average. Conclusions: We conclude that Mobius3D can be used interchangeably with phantom-based dosimetry systems, which are commonly used as patient-specific prescription dose verification tools, especially under the conditions of 3%/3 mm and 95% pass rate.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.35
• /
• pp.15-21
• /
• 2023

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare the performance of the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA) and portal dose image prediction (PDIP) for patient-specific quality assurance based on electronic portal imaging device, and to evaluate the clinical feasibility of portal dosimetry using AAA. Subjects and methods: We retrospectively selected a total of 32 patients, including 15 lung cancer patients and 17 liver cancer patients. Verification plans were generated using PDIP and AAA. We obtained gamma passing rates by comparing the calculated distribution with the measured distribution and obtained MLC positional difference values. Results: The mean gamma passing rate for lung cancer patients was 99.5% ± 1.1% for 3%/3 mm using PDIP and 90.6% ± 5.8% for 1%/1 mm. Using AAA, the mean gamma passing rate was 98.9% ± 1.7% for 3%/3 mm and 87.8% ± 5.2% for 1%/1 mm. The mean gamma passing rate for liver cancer patients was 99.9% ± 0.3% for 3%/3 mm using PDIP and 96.6% ± 4.6% for 1%/1 mm. Using AAA, the mean gamma passing rate was 99.6% ± 0.5% for 3%/3 mm and 89.5% ± 6.4% for 1%/1 mm. The MLC positional difference was small at 0.013 mm ± 0.002 mm and showed no correlation with the gamma passing rate. Conclusion: The AAA algorithm can be clinically used as a portal dosimetry calculation algorithm for patientspecific quality assurance based on electronic portal imaging device.