Premium
SU‐F‐J‐129: Verification of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Respiratory Management Systems Using Homemade Phantom
Author(s) -
Goksel E,
Kucucuk H,
Senkesen O,
Tezcanli E
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 - 10.1118/1.4956037
Subject(s) - imaging phantom , linear particle accelerator , truebeam , computer science , nuclear medicine , dosimetry , radiation treatment planning , physics , medical physics , medicine , radiation therapy , optics , radiology , beam (structure)
Purpose: Different placements of Infrared Cameras (IRC) in CT and treatment rooms can cause gating window level (GWL) variations leading to differences between GWL used for planning and treatments. Although, Varian Clinac DHX‐OBI sytem and CT are equipped with the same kind of IRC, Truebeam STx (TB) has a different type of IRC known as banana type. In this study; geometric and dosimetric accuracy of respiratory management system (RPM) for different machines were investigated with a special homemade phantom. Methods: Special phantom was placed on the respiratory simulator machine and a CT data set was obtained at the end of the expirium phase (EOE). Conformal and IMRT plans were generated on the EOE CT image series for both DHX‐OBI and TB LINACs while a VMAT plan was generated only for TB.The acquired respiratory graphs in the CT were directly sent to DHX‐OBI system, and they were converted with software before sending to TB. EBT3 films were placed inside the phantom and were irradiated using RPM system with two machines for different plans. Planar dose distributions were compared with gamma analysis (GA) method (3mm, %3) to evaluate planned‐measured dose differences. In addition, radio‐opac marker was placed in the center of the phantom to evaluate the geometric accuracy of treatment field with gated flouroscopy (GF). Results: There were no shifts detected between planning and treeatment GWL for both DHX‐OBI and TB. Difference on the GF image between digital graticule and radio‐opac marker was <1mm for TB and 1mm for DHX‐OBI. Although, GA agreement was 97% for conformal and IMRT techniques in TB, it was 96% for VMAT technique. While GA agreement was 98% for conformal technique in DHX‐OBI, IMRT was 95%.ConclusionThis study showed that RPM can be used accurately in spite of different IRC placements or different types of ICR used.