Cargando…
Quality assurance of a gimbaled head swing verification using feature point tracking
To perform dynamic tumor tracking (DTT) for clinical applications safely and accurately, gimbaled head swing verification is important. We propose a quantitative gimbaled head swing verification method for daily quality assurance (QA), which uses feature point tracking and a web camera. The web came...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5689884/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28291928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12004 |
_version_ | 1783279478087090176 |
---|---|
author | Miura, Hideharu Ozawa, Shuichi Enosaki, Tsubasa Kawakubo, Atsushi Hosono, Fumika Yamada, Kiyoshi Nagata, Yasushi |
author_facet | Miura, Hideharu Ozawa, Shuichi Enosaki, Tsubasa Kawakubo, Atsushi Hosono, Fumika Yamada, Kiyoshi Nagata, Yasushi |
author_sort | Miura, Hideharu |
collection | PubMed |
description | To perform dynamic tumor tracking (DTT) for clinical applications safely and accurately, gimbaled head swing verification is important. We propose a quantitative gimbaled head swing verification method for daily quality assurance (QA), which uses feature point tracking and a web camera. The web camera was placed on a couch at the same position for every gimbaled head swing verification, and could move based on a determined input function (sinusoidal patterns; amplitude: ± 20 mm; cycle: 3 s) in the pan and tilt directions at isocenter plane. Two continuous images were then analyzed for each feature point using the pyramidal Lucas–Kanade (LK) method, which is an optical flow estimation algorithm. We used a tapped hole as a feature point of the gimbaled head. The period and amplitude were analyzed to acquire a quantitative gimbaled head swing value for daily QA. The mean ± SD of the period were 3.00 ± 0.03 (range: 3.00–3.07) s and 3.00 ± 0.02 (range: 3.00–3.07) s in the pan and tilt directions, respectively. The mean ± SD of the relative displacement were 19.7 ± 0.08 (range: 19.6–19.8) mm and 18.9 ± 0.2 (range: 18.4–19.5) mm in the pan and tilt directions, respectively. The gimbaled head swing was reliable for DTT. We propose a quantitative gimbaled head swing verification method for daily QA using the feature point tracking method and a web camera. Our method can quantitatively assess the gimbaled head swing for daily QA from baseline values, measured at the time of acceptance and commissioning. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5689884 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56898842018-04-02 Quality assurance of a gimbaled head swing verification using feature point tracking Miura, Hideharu Ozawa, Shuichi Enosaki, Tsubasa Kawakubo, Atsushi Hosono, Fumika Yamada, Kiyoshi Nagata, Yasushi J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics To perform dynamic tumor tracking (DTT) for clinical applications safely and accurately, gimbaled head swing verification is important. We propose a quantitative gimbaled head swing verification method for daily quality assurance (QA), which uses feature point tracking and a web camera. The web camera was placed on a couch at the same position for every gimbaled head swing verification, and could move based on a determined input function (sinusoidal patterns; amplitude: ± 20 mm; cycle: 3 s) in the pan and tilt directions at isocenter plane. Two continuous images were then analyzed for each feature point using the pyramidal Lucas–Kanade (LK) method, which is an optical flow estimation algorithm. We used a tapped hole as a feature point of the gimbaled head. The period and amplitude were analyzed to acquire a quantitative gimbaled head swing value for daily QA. The mean ± SD of the period were 3.00 ± 0.03 (range: 3.00–3.07) s and 3.00 ± 0.02 (range: 3.00–3.07) s in the pan and tilt directions, respectively. The mean ± SD of the relative displacement were 19.7 ± 0.08 (range: 19.6–19.8) mm and 18.9 ± 0.2 (range: 18.4–19.5) mm in the pan and tilt directions, respectively. The gimbaled head swing was reliable for DTT. We propose a quantitative gimbaled head swing verification method for daily QA using the feature point tracking method and a web camera. Our method can quantitatively assess the gimbaled head swing for daily QA from baseline values, measured at the time of acceptance and commissioning. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-11-21 /pmc/articles/PMC5689884/ /pubmed/28291928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12004 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Radiation Oncology Physics Miura, Hideharu Ozawa, Shuichi Enosaki, Tsubasa Kawakubo, Atsushi Hosono, Fumika Yamada, Kiyoshi Nagata, Yasushi Quality assurance of a gimbaled head swing verification using feature point tracking |
title | Quality assurance of a gimbaled head swing verification using feature point tracking |
title_full | Quality assurance of a gimbaled head swing verification using feature point tracking |
title_fullStr | Quality assurance of a gimbaled head swing verification using feature point tracking |
title_full_unstemmed | Quality assurance of a gimbaled head swing verification using feature point tracking |
title_short | Quality assurance of a gimbaled head swing verification using feature point tracking |
title_sort | quality assurance of a gimbaled head swing verification using feature point tracking |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5689884/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28291928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12004 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT miurahideharu qualityassuranceofagimbaledheadswingverificationusingfeaturepointtracking AT ozawashuichi qualityassuranceofagimbaledheadswingverificationusingfeaturepointtracking AT enosakitsubasa qualityassuranceofagimbaledheadswingverificationusingfeaturepointtracking AT kawakuboatsushi qualityassuranceofagimbaledheadswingverificationusingfeaturepointtracking AT hosonofumika qualityassuranceofagimbaledheadswingverificationusingfeaturepointtracking AT yamadakiyoshi qualityassuranceofagimbaledheadswingverificationusingfeaturepointtracking AT nagatayasushi qualityassuranceofagimbaledheadswingverificationusingfeaturepointtracking |