Cargando…

Evaluation of tracking accuracy of the CyberKnife system using a webcam and printed calibrated grid

Tracking accuracy for the CyberKnife's Synchrony system is commonly evaluated using a film‐based verification method. We have evaluated a verification system that uses a webcam and a printed calibrated grid to verify tracking accuracy over three different motion patterns. A box with an attached...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sumida, Iori, Shiomi, Hiroya, Higashinaka, Naokazu, Murashima, Yoshikazu, Miyamoto, Youichi, Yamazaki, Hideya, Mabuchi, Nobuhisa, Tsuda, Eimei, Ogawa, Kazuhiko
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/PMC5875552/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27074474
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v17i2.5914
Descripción
Sumario:Tracking accuracy for the CyberKnife's Synchrony system is commonly evaluated using a film‐based verification method. We have evaluated a verification system that uses a webcam and a printed calibrated grid to verify tracking accuracy over three different motion patterns. A box with an attached printed calibrated grid and four fiducial markers was attached to the motion phantom. A target marker was positioned at the grid's center. The box was set up using the other three markers. Target tracking accuracy was evaluated under three conditions: 1) stationary; 2) sinusoidal motion with different amplitudes of 5, 10, 15, and 20 mm for the same cycle of 4 s and different cycles of 2, 4, 6, and 8 s with the same amplitude of 15 mm; and 3) irregular breathing patterns in six human volunteers breathing normally. Infrared markers were placed on the volunteers’ abdomens, and their trajectories were used to simulate the target motion. All tests were performed with one‐dimensional motion in craniocaudal direction. The webcam captured the grid's motion and a laser beam was used to simulate the CyberKnife's beam. Tracking error was defined as the difference between the grid's center and the laser beam. With a stationary target, mean tracking error was measured at 0.4 mm. For sinusoidal motion, tracking error was less than 2 mm for any amplitude and breathing cycle. For the volunteers’ breathing patterns, the mean tracking error range was 0.78‐1.67 mm. Therefore, accurate lesion targeting requires individual quality assurance for each patient. PACS number(s): 87.55.D‐, 87.55.km, 87.55.Qr, 87.56.Fc