Premium
Optical imaging provides rapid verification of static small beams, radiosurgery, and VMAT plans with millimeter resolution
Author(s) -
Ashraf Muhammad Ramish,
Bruza Petr,
Pogue Brian W.,
Nelson Nathan,
Williams Benjamin B.,
Jarvis Lesley A.,
Gladstone David J.
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1002/mp.13797
Subject(s) - multileaf collimator , collimator , image resolution , beam (structure) , nuclear medicine , optics , linear particle accelerator , radiosurgery , dosimeter , dosimetry , collimated light , sensitivity (control systems) , intensity modulation , materials science , physics , radiation therapy , medicine , laser , engineering , radiology , electronic engineering , phase modulation , phase noise
Purpose We demonstrate the feasibility of optical imaging as a quality assurance tool for static small beamlets, and pretreatment verification tool for radiosurgery and volumetric‐modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plans. Methods Small static beams and clinical VMAT plans were simulated in a treatment planning system (TPS) and delivered to a cylindrical tank filled with water‐based liquid scintillator. Emission was imaged using a blue‐sensitive, intensified CMOS camera time‐gated to the linac pulses. For static beams, percentage depth and cross beam profiles of projected intensity distribution were compared to TPS data. Two‐dimensional (2D) gamma analysis was performed on all clinical plans, and the technique was tested for sensitivity against common errors (multileaf collimator position, gantry angle) by inducing deliberate errors in the VMAT plans control points. The technique’s detection limits for spatial resolution and the smallest number of control points that could be imaged reliably were also tested. The sensitivity to common delivery errors was also compared against a commercial 2.5D diode array dosimeter. Results A spatial resolution of 1 mm was achieved with our imaging setup. The optical projected percentage depth intensity profiles agreed to within 2% relative to the TPS data for small static square beams (5, 10, and 50 mm 2 ). For projected cross beam profiles, a gamma pass rate >99% was achieved for a 3%/1 mm criteria. All clinical plans passed the 3%/3 mm criteria with >95% passing rate. A static 5 mm beam with 20 Monitor Units could be measured with an average percent difference of 5.5 ± 3% relative to the TPS. The technique was sensitive to multileaf collimator errors down to 1 mm and gantry angle errors of 1°. Conclusions Optical imaging provides ample spatial resolution for imaging small beams. The ability to faithfully image down to 20 MU of 5 mm, 6 MV beamlets prove the ability to perform quality assurance for each control point within dynamic plans. The technique is sensitive to small offset errors in gantry angles and multileaf collimator (MLC) leaf positions, and at certain scenario, it exhibits higher sensitivity than a commercial 2.5D diode array.