Cargando…

Technical evaluation of TomoTherapy automatic roll correction

The TomoTherapy Hi·Art System allows the application of rotational corrections as a part of the pretreatment image guidance process. This study outlines a custom method to perform an end‐to‐end evaluation of the TomoTherapy Hi·Art roll correction feature. A roll‐sensitive plan was designed and deliv...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Laub, Steve, Snyder, Michael, Burmeister, Jay
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5690141/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26103471
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i3.4836
_version_ 1783279539414106112
author Laub, Steve
Snyder, Michael
Burmeister, Jay
author_facet Laub, Steve
Snyder, Michael
Burmeister, Jay
author_sort Laub, Steve
collection PubMed
description The TomoTherapy Hi·Art System allows the application of rotational corrections as a part of the pretreatment image guidance process. This study outlines a custom method to perform an end‐to‐end evaluation of the TomoTherapy Hi·Art roll correction feature. A roll‐sensitive plan was designed and delivered to a cylindrical solid water phantom to test the accuracy of roll corrections, as well as the ability of the automatic registration feature to detect induced roll. Cylindrical target structures containing coaxial inner avoidance structures were placed adjacent to the plane bisecting the phantom and 7 cm laterally off central axis. The phantom was positioned at isocenter with the target‐plane parallel to the couch surface. Varying degrees of phantom roll were induced and dose to the targets and inner avoidance structures was measured using Kodak EDR2 films placed in the target‐plane. Normalized point doses were compared with baseline (no roll) data to determine the sensitivity of the test and the effectiveness of the roll correction feature. Gamma analysis comparing baseline, roll‐corrected, and uncorrected films was performed using film analysis software. MVCT images were acquired prior to plan delivery. Measured roll was compared with induced roll to evaluate the automatic registration feature's ability to detect rotational misalignment. Rotations beyond 0.3° result in statistically significant deviation from baseline point measurements. Gamma pass rates begin to drop below 90% at approximately 0.5° induced rotation at [Formula: see text] and between 0.2° and 0.3° for 2%/2 mm. With roll correction applied, point dose measurements for all rotations are indistinguishable from baseline, and gamma pass rates exceed 96% when using 3% and 3 mm as evaluation criteria. Measured roll via the automatic registration algorithm agrees with induced rotation to within the test sensitivity for nearly all imaging settings. The TomoTherapy automatic registration system accurately detects induced rotations, and the method presented here for evaluation of the roll correction feature is easily implemented by any clinic with a TomoTherapy Hi·Art unit. This method is sensitive to well within half a degree and demonstrates that the TomoTherapy Hi·Art roll correction feature accurately corrects for induced rotational misalignments to within this level of uncertainty. PACS numbers: 87.53.Jw, 87.53.Kn, 87.55.Qr, 87.57.nj
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5690141
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56901412018-04-02 Technical evaluation of TomoTherapy automatic roll correction Laub, Steve Snyder, Michael Burmeister, Jay J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics The TomoTherapy Hi·Art System allows the application of rotational corrections as a part of the pretreatment image guidance process. This study outlines a custom method to perform an end‐to‐end evaluation of the TomoTherapy Hi·Art roll correction feature. A roll‐sensitive plan was designed and delivered to a cylindrical solid water phantom to test the accuracy of roll corrections, as well as the ability of the automatic registration feature to detect induced roll. Cylindrical target structures containing coaxial inner avoidance structures were placed adjacent to the plane bisecting the phantom and 7 cm laterally off central axis. The phantom was positioned at isocenter with the target‐plane parallel to the couch surface. Varying degrees of phantom roll were induced and dose to the targets and inner avoidance structures was measured using Kodak EDR2 films placed in the target‐plane. Normalized point doses were compared with baseline (no roll) data to determine the sensitivity of the test and the effectiveness of the roll correction feature. Gamma analysis comparing baseline, roll‐corrected, and uncorrected films was performed using film analysis software. MVCT images were acquired prior to plan delivery. Measured roll was compared with induced roll to evaluate the automatic registration feature's ability to detect rotational misalignment. Rotations beyond 0.3° result in statistically significant deviation from baseline point measurements. Gamma pass rates begin to drop below 90% at approximately 0.5° induced rotation at [Formula: see text] and between 0.2° and 0.3° for 2%/2 mm. With roll correction applied, point dose measurements for all rotations are indistinguishable from baseline, and gamma pass rates exceed 96% when using 3% and 3 mm as evaluation criteria. Measured roll via the automatic registration algorithm agrees with induced rotation to within the test sensitivity for nearly all imaging settings. The TomoTherapy automatic registration system accurately detects induced rotations, and the method presented here for evaluation of the roll correction feature is easily implemented by any clinic with a TomoTherapy Hi·Art unit. This method is sensitive to well within half a degree and demonstrates that the TomoTherapy Hi·Art roll correction feature accurately corrects for induced rotational misalignments to within this level of uncertainty. PACS numbers: 87.53.Jw, 87.53.Kn, 87.55.Qr, 87.57.nj John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015-05-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5690141/ /pubmed/26103471 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i3.4836 Text en © 2015 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Laub, Steve
Snyder, Michael
Burmeister, Jay
Technical evaluation of TomoTherapy automatic roll correction
title Technical evaluation of TomoTherapy automatic roll correction
title_full Technical evaluation of TomoTherapy automatic roll correction
title_fullStr Technical evaluation of TomoTherapy automatic roll correction
title_full_unstemmed Technical evaluation of TomoTherapy automatic roll correction
title_short Technical evaluation of TomoTherapy automatic roll correction
title_sort technical evaluation of tomotherapy automatic roll correction
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5690141/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26103471
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i3.4836
work_keys_str_mv AT laubsteve technicalevaluationoftomotherapyautomaticrollcorrection
AT snydermichael technicalevaluationoftomotherapyautomaticrollcorrection
AT burmeisterjay technicalevaluationoftomotherapyautomaticrollcorrection