Development and Longitudinal Analysis of Plan-Based Streamlined Quality Assurance on Multiple Positioning Guidance Systems With Single Phantom Setup

This study was to propose and validate an efficient and streamlined quality assurance (QA) method with a single phantom setup to check performances of patient positioning guidance systems including six-degree-of-freedom (6DoF) couch, X-ray modalities (kV-kV, MV-MV and CBCT), optical surface imaging...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Frontiers in oncology 2021-06, Vol.11, p.683733-683733
Main Authors: Zhou, Shun, Li, Junyu, Du, Yi, Yu, Songmao, Wang, Meijiao, Wu, Hao, Yue, Haizhen
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
image guided radiotherapy
Oncology
positioning guidance
quality assurance
robotic couch
surface imaging
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This study was to propose and validate an efficient and streamlined quality assurance (QA) method with a single phantom setup to check performances of patient positioning guidance systems including six-degree-of-freedom (6DoF) couch, X-ray modalities (kV-kV, MV-MV and CBCT), optical surface imaging system (AlignRT), lasers and optical distance indicator (ODI). The QA method was based on a pseudo-patient treatment plan using the AlignRT cube phantom. The cube was first randomly set up on the couch, and the initial position offsets were acquired by AlignRT and CBCT. The cube was restored to its reference position by 6DoF couch shift, during which the couch motion accuracy and tracking performances of AlignRT and CBCT were derived. After that, the residual offsets were acquired by kV-kV, MV-MV and AlignRT to derive the isocenter discrepancies. Finally, the laser alignment and ODI values were visually inspected. The QA procedure had been internally approved as a standard weekly QA test, and the results over 50 weeks were longitudinally analyzed for clinical validation. The 6DoF couch motion errors as well as the tracking errors of AlignRT were sub-millimeter and sub-degree, and no deviation over 1 mm or 1 deg was identified. The ROI mode of isocenter (ISO) in AlignRT exhibited more consistent results than the centroid (CEN). While the isocenter discrepancy between CBCT and kV-kV was negligible, the maximal discrepancies between CBCT and MV-MV were 0.4 mm in LNG and 0.3 deg in PITCH. The isocenter discrepancies between CBCT and AlignRT were
ISSN:2234-943X
2234-943X
DOI:10.3389/fonc.2021.683733