Cargando…

The dosimetric impact of control point spacing for sliding gap MLC fields

Dynamic sliding gap multileaf collimator (MLC) fields are used to model MLC properties within the treatment planning system (TPS) for dynamic treatments. One of the key MLC properties in the Eclipse TPS is the dosimetric leaf gap (DLG) and precise determination of this parameter is paramount to ensu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zwan, Benjamin J., Hindmarsh, Jonathan, Seymour, Erin, Kandasamy, Kankean, Sloan, Kirbie, David, Rajesakar, Lee, Christopher
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/PMC5690523/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27929494
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i6.6345
_version_ 1783279626396631040
author Zwan, Benjamin J.
Hindmarsh, Jonathan
Seymour, Erin
Kandasamy, Kankean
Sloan, Kirbie
David, Rajesakar
Lee, Christopher
author_facet Zwan, Benjamin J.
Hindmarsh, Jonathan
Seymour, Erin
Kandasamy, Kankean
Sloan, Kirbie
David, Rajesakar
Lee, Christopher
author_sort Zwan, Benjamin J.
collection PubMed
description Dynamic sliding gap multileaf collimator (MLC) fields are used to model MLC properties within the treatment planning system (TPS) for dynamic treatments. One of the key MLC properties in the Eclipse TPS is the dosimetric leaf gap (DLG) and precise determination of this parameter is paramount to ensuring accurate dose delivery. In this investigation, we report on how the spacing between control points (CPs) for sliding gap fields impacts the dose delivery, MLC positioning accuracy, and measurement of the DLG. The central axis dose was measured for sliding gap MLC fields with gap widths ranging from 2 to 40 mm. It was found that for deliveries containing two CPs, the central axis dose was underestimated by the TPS for all gap widths, with the maximum difference being 8% for a 2 mm gap field. For the same sliding gap fields containing 50 CPs, the measured dose was always within [Formula: see text] of the TPS dose. By directly measuring the MLC trajectories we show that this dose difference is due to a systematic MLC gap error for fields containing two CPs, and that the cause of this error is due to the leaf position offset table which is incorrectly applied when the spacing between CPs is too large. This MLC gap error resulted in an increase in the measured DLG of 0.5 mm for both 6 MV and 10 MV, when using fields with 2 CPs compared to 50 CPs. Furthermore, this change in DLG was shown to decrease the mean TPS‐calculated dose to the target volume by 2.6% for a clinical IMRT test plan. This work has shown that systematic MLC positioning errors occur for sliding gap MLC fields containing two CPs and that using these fields to model critical TPS parameters, such as the DLG, may result in clinically significant systematic dose calculation errors during subsequent dynamic MLC treatments. PACS number(s): 87.56.nk
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5690523
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56905232018-04-02 The dosimetric impact of control point spacing for sliding gap MLC fields Zwan, Benjamin J. Hindmarsh, Jonathan Seymour, Erin Kandasamy, Kankean Sloan, Kirbie David, Rajesakar Lee, Christopher J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics Dynamic sliding gap multileaf collimator (MLC) fields are used to model MLC properties within the treatment planning system (TPS) for dynamic treatments. One of the key MLC properties in the Eclipse TPS is the dosimetric leaf gap (DLG) and precise determination of this parameter is paramount to ensuring accurate dose delivery. In this investigation, we report on how the spacing between control points (CPs) for sliding gap fields impacts the dose delivery, MLC positioning accuracy, and measurement of the DLG. The central axis dose was measured for sliding gap MLC fields with gap widths ranging from 2 to 40 mm. It was found that for deliveries containing two CPs, the central axis dose was underestimated by the TPS for all gap widths, with the maximum difference being 8% for a 2 mm gap field. For the same sliding gap fields containing 50 CPs, the measured dose was always within [Formula: see text] of the TPS dose. By directly measuring the MLC trajectories we show that this dose difference is due to a systematic MLC gap error for fields containing two CPs, and that the cause of this error is due to the leaf position offset table which is incorrectly applied when the spacing between CPs is too large. This MLC gap error resulted in an increase in the measured DLG of 0.5 mm for both 6 MV and 10 MV, when using fields with 2 CPs compared to 50 CPs. Furthermore, this change in DLG was shown to decrease the mean TPS‐calculated dose to the target volume by 2.6% for a clinical IMRT test plan. This work has shown that systematic MLC positioning errors occur for sliding gap MLC fields containing two CPs and that using these fields to model critical TPS parameters, such as the DLG, may result in clinically significant systematic dose calculation errors during subsequent dynamic MLC treatments. PACS number(s): 87.56.nk John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5690523/ /pubmed/27929494 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i6.6345 Text en © 2016 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
Zwan, Benjamin J.
Hindmarsh, Jonathan
Seymour, Erin
Kandasamy, Kankean
Sloan, Kirbie
David, Rajesakar
Lee, Christopher
The dosimetric impact of control point spacing for sliding gap MLC fields
title The dosimetric impact of control point spacing for sliding gap MLC fields
title_full The dosimetric impact of control point spacing for sliding gap MLC fields
title_fullStr The dosimetric impact of control point spacing for sliding gap MLC fields
title_full_unstemmed The dosimetric impact of control point spacing for sliding gap MLC fields
title_short The dosimetric impact of control point spacing for sliding gap MLC fields
title_sort dosimetric impact of control point spacing for sliding gap mlc fields
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5690523/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27929494
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i6.6345
work_keys_str_mv AT zwanbenjaminj thedosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT hindmarshjonathan thedosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT seymourerin thedosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT kandasamykankean thedosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT sloankirbie thedosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT davidrajesakar thedosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT leechristopher thedosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT zwanbenjaminj dosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT hindmarshjonathan dosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT seymourerin dosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT kandasamykankean dosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT sloankirbie dosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT davidrajesakar dosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields
AT leechristopher dosimetricimpactofcontrolpointspacingforslidinggapmlcfields