Premium
SU‐E‐T‐639: A Study On the Response of 2D Array Detector for VMAT Delivery for a Period of Two Years
Author(s) -
kumar syam,
George Anu
Publication year - 2014
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 - 10.1118/1.4888975
Subject(s) - nuclear medicine , standard deviation , imaging phantom , mathematics , significant difference , quality assurance , medicine , medical physics , computer science , statistics , external quality assessment , pathology
Purpose: To evaluate the 2D array for radiation response for a period of 2 years. Methods: 45 VMAT plans already treated and quality assured before 2 years, 1.5 years and 1 year were selected for the study. Quality assurances of the plans were done using 2D array combined with Octavius phantom. Verification plans were recalculated without changing any parameters in Eclipse 10.0 TPS using the AAA algorithm. Response of 2D array to the plans treated before 2 years, 1.5 years and 1 year where evaluated. The results were analyzed using the Gamma analysis method with the standard gamma passing criteria of 3mm distance to agreement (DTA) and 3% dose difference (DD). Results: All the plans evaluated passed the gamma analysis with a percentage greater than 95, except for three cases. Higher gamma passing criteria where observed for all the analyzed plans, when analysis done before 2 years, 1.5 years and 1 year. The standard deviation of ± 1.38, ± 1.40,± 0.97 where observed between the plans when verification plans did before 2 years, 1.5 years and 1 year respectively. Same set of plans shows a standard deviation of ± 0.70, ± 1.36, and ± 1.18, when analysis done recently. A significance difference in response of the array when analysis done recently for the verification plans treated and quality assured before 2 years. This indicates a slightly reduced response of 2D array towards radiation response as the array gets older. Conclusion: It is found that 2D array shows a reduced response against radiation detection over a period of years. An onsite calibration of the instrument is recommended before the measurements. A dose correction factor can be applied if necessary to the results if the radiation response and efficiency of the array is very poor.