Premium
SU‐F‐J‐20: Commissioning and Acceptance Testing of the C‐Rad CatalystHD Surface Imaging System
Author(s) -
Stanley D,
Rasmussen K,
Kirby N,
Papanikolaou N,
Gutierrez A
Publication year - 2016
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 - 10.1118/1.4955928
Subject(s) - imaging phantom , reproducibility , acceptance testing , image guided radiation therapy , computer science , medical physics , simulation , medical imaging , optics , physics , mathematics , artificial intelligence , statistics , software engineering
With the increasing use of surface‐based, nonionizing image‐guided radiotherapy (IGRT) systems, a comprehensive set of clinical acceptance and commissioning procedures are needed to ensure correct functionality and proper clinical integration. Although TG‐147 provides a specific set of parameters, measurement methodologies have yet to be described. The aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive overview of the commissioning and acceptance analysis performed for the C‐Rad CatalystHD imaging system. Methods and Materials: Methodology for the commissioning and acceptance of the C‐Rad CatalystHD imaging system was developed using commercially available clinical equipment. Following TG‐147 guidelines, the following tests were performed: integration of peripheral equipment, system drift, static spatial reproducibility and localization accuracy, static end‐to‐end analysis, static rotational accuracy, dynamic spatial accuracy, dynamic temporal accuracy, dynamic radiation delivery and a comprehensive end‐to‐end analysis. Results: The field of view (FOV) of the CatalystHD was 105×109×83 cm3 in the lateral, longitudinal and vertical directions. For thermal equilibrium and system drift, a thermal drift of 1.0mm was noted. A 45 min warmup time is recommended if the system has been shut off an extended period of time (>24 hours) before the QA procedure to eliminate any thermal drift. Spatial reproducibility was found to be 0.05±0.03 mm using a rigid phantom. For the static localization accuracy, system agreement with couch shifts was within 0.1±0.1 mm and positioning agreement with kV‐CBCT was 0.16±0.10 mm. For static rotational accuracy, system agreement with a high precision rotational stage (0.01 deg precision) was within 0.10±0.07 deg. Dynamic spatial and temporal localization accuracy was found to be within 0.2±0.1 mm. Conclusion: A comprehensive commissioning and acceptance study was performed using commercially available phantoms and in‐house methodologies to provide a performance evaluation of the CatalystHD imaging system.