Open AccessDevelopment of clinically relevant QA procedures for the BrainLab ExacTrac imaging system
Author(s) -
Iftimia Ileana,
Halvorsen Per H.
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of applied clinical medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.83
H-Index - 48
ISSN - 1526-9914
DOI - 10.1002/acm2.12301
Subject(s) - isocenter , imaging phantom , collimator , nuclear medicine , image quality , quality assurance , detector , optical transfer function , noise (video) , dicom , image resolution , physics , optics , computer science , medicine , artificial intelligence , external quality assessment , pathology , image (mathematics)
Purpose The aim of this study was to develop Quality Assurance procedures for the BrainLab ExacTrac ( ET ) imaging system following the TG 142 recommendations for planar kV imaging systems. Materials and Methods A custom‐designed 3D printed holder was used to position the Standard Imaging QC kV‐1 phantom at isocenter, facing the ET X ray tubes. The linac's light field (collimator at 45⁰) was used to position the phantom holder. The ET images were exported to ARIA where geometric distortion was checked. The DICOM images were analyzed in the PIPS pro software. The following parameters were recorded (technique 80 kV /2mAs): spatial resolution (Modulated Transfer Function ( MTF ) F50/F40/F30), contrast‐to‐noise ratio ( CNR ), and noise. A baseline was generated for future image analysis. Beam quality and exposure were measured using the Unfors R/F detector. Using a rod holder, the detector was placed at isocenter, facing each ET X‐ray tube. The measurements were performed for all preset protocols ranging from cranial low (80 kV/6.3 mAs) to abdomen high (145 kV/25 mAs). The total exposure was converted to dose. Results and Discussion The image quality parameters were close for the two tubes. A common baseline was therefore generated. The average baseline values (both tubes, both images/tube) were 1.06/1.18/1.30, 1.32, and 67.3 for the MTF F50/F40/F30, noise, and CNR respectively. The procedure described here was used for another 24 sets. Using a positioning template and 3D printed phantom holder, experimental reproducibility has been acceptably high. The measured phantom dimensions were within 1 mm from the nominal values. The measured kV values were within 2% of the nominal values. The exposure values for the two tubes were comparable. The range of total measured dose was 0.099 mG y (cranial low) to 1.353 mG y (abdomen high). Conclusions A reliable process has been implemented for QA of the ET imaging system by characterizing the system's performance at isocenter, consistent with clinical conventions.