Cargando…
Insensitivity of machine log files to MLC leaf backlash and effect of MLC backlash on clinical dynamic MLC motion: An experimental investigation
PURPOSE: Multi‐leaf‐collimator (MLC) leaf position accuracy is important for accurate dynamic radiotherapy treatment plan delivery. Machine log files have become widely utilized for quality assurance (QA) of such dynamic treatments. The primary aim is to test the sensitivity of machine log files in...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9512360/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35678793 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13660 |
_version_ | 1784797833776332800 |
---|---|
author | Barnes, Michael Pomare, Dennis Doebrich, Marcus Standen, Therese S. Wolf, Joshua Greer, Peter Simpson, John |
author_facet | Barnes, Michael Pomare, Dennis Doebrich, Marcus Standen, Therese S. Wolf, Joshua Greer, Peter Simpson, John |
author_sort | Barnes, Michael |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: Multi‐leaf‐collimator (MLC) leaf position accuracy is important for accurate dynamic radiotherapy treatment plan delivery. Machine log files have become widely utilized for quality assurance (QA) of such dynamic treatments. The primary aim is to test the sensitivity of machine log files in comparison to electronic portal imaging device (EPID)‐based measurements to MLC position errors caused by leaf backlash. The secondary aim is to investigate the effect of MLC leaf backlash on MLC leaf motion during clinical dynamic plan delivery. METHODS: The sensitivity of machine log files and two EPID‐based measurements were assessed via a controlled experiment, whereby the length of the “T” section of a series of 12 MLC leaf T‐nuts in a Varian Millennium MLC for a Trilogy C‐series type linac was reduced by sandpapering the top of the “T” to introduce backlash. The built‐in machine MLC leaf backlash test as well as measurements for two EPID‐based dynamic MLC positional tests along with log files were recorded pre‐ and post‐T‐nut modification. All methods were investigated for sensitivity to the T‐nut change by assessing the effect on measured MLC leaf positions. A reduced version of the experiment was repeated on a TrueBeam type linac with Millennium MLC. RESULTS: No significant differences before and after T‐nut modification were detected in any of the log file data. Both EPID methods demonstrated sensitivity to the introduced change at approximately the expected magnitude with a strong dependence observed with gantry angle. EPID‐based data showed MLC positional error in agreement with the micrometer measured T‐nut length change to 0.07 ± 0.05 mm (1 SD) using the departmental routine QA test. Backlash results were consistent between linac types. CONCLUSION: Machine log files appear insensitive to MLC position errors caused by MLC leaf backlash introduced via the T‐nut. The effect of backlash on clinical MLC motions is heavily gantry angle dependent. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9512360 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-95123602022-09-30 Insensitivity of machine log files to MLC leaf backlash and effect of MLC backlash on clinical dynamic MLC motion: An experimental investigation Barnes, Michael Pomare, Dennis Doebrich, Marcus Standen, Therese S. Wolf, Joshua Greer, Peter Simpson, John J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics PURPOSE: Multi‐leaf‐collimator (MLC) leaf position accuracy is important for accurate dynamic radiotherapy treatment plan delivery. Machine log files have become widely utilized for quality assurance (QA) of such dynamic treatments. The primary aim is to test the sensitivity of machine log files in comparison to electronic portal imaging device (EPID)‐based measurements to MLC position errors caused by leaf backlash. The secondary aim is to investigate the effect of MLC leaf backlash on MLC leaf motion during clinical dynamic plan delivery. METHODS: The sensitivity of machine log files and two EPID‐based measurements were assessed via a controlled experiment, whereby the length of the “T” section of a series of 12 MLC leaf T‐nuts in a Varian Millennium MLC for a Trilogy C‐series type linac was reduced by sandpapering the top of the “T” to introduce backlash. The built‐in machine MLC leaf backlash test as well as measurements for two EPID‐based dynamic MLC positional tests along with log files were recorded pre‐ and post‐T‐nut modification. All methods were investigated for sensitivity to the T‐nut change by assessing the effect on measured MLC leaf positions. A reduced version of the experiment was repeated on a TrueBeam type linac with Millennium MLC. RESULTS: No significant differences before and after T‐nut modification were detected in any of the log file data. Both EPID methods demonstrated sensitivity to the introduced change at approximately the expected magnitude with a strong dependence observed with gantry angle. EPID‐based data showed MLC positional error in agreement with the micrometer measured T‐nut length change to 0.07 ± 0.05 mm (1 SD) using the departmental routine QA test. Backlash results were consistent between linac types. CONCLUSION: Machine log files appear insensitive to MLC position errors caused by MLC leaf backlash introduced via the T‐nut. The effect of backlash on clinical MLC motions is heavily gantry angle dependent. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9512360/ /pubmed/35678793 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13660 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, LLC on behalf of The American Association of Physicists in Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://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 Barnes, Michael Pomare, Dennis Doebrich, Marcus Standen, Therese S. Wolf, Joshua Greer, Peter Simpson, John Insensitivity of machine log files to MLC leaf backlash and effect of MLC backlash on clinical dynamic MLC motion: An experimental investigation |
title | Insensitivity of machine log files to MLC leaf backlash and effect of MLC backlash on clinical dynamic MLC motion: An experimental investigation |
title_full | Insensitivity of machine log files to MLC leaf backlash and effect of MLC backlash on clinical dynamic MLC motion: An experimental investigation |
title_fullStr | Insensitivity of machine log files to MLC leaf backlash and effect of MLC backlash on clinical dynamic MLC motion: An experimental investigation |
title_full_unstemmed | Insensitivity of machine log files to MLC leaf backlash and effect of MLC backlash on clinical dynamic MLC motion: An experimental investigation |
title_short | Insensitivity of machine log files to MLC leaf backlash and effect of MLC backlash on clinical dynamic MLC motion: An experimental investigation |
title_sort | insensitivity of machine log files to mlc leaf backlash and effect of mlc backlash on clinical dynamic mlc motion: an experimental investigation |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9512360/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35678793 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.13660 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT barnesmichael insensitivityofmachinelogfilestomlcleafbacklashandeffectofmlcbacklashonclinicaldynamicmlcmotionanexperimentalinvestigation AT pomaredennis insensitivityofmachinelogfilestomlcleafbacklashandeffectofmlcbacklashonclinicaldynamicmlcmotionanexperimentalinvestigation AT doebrichmarcus insensitivityofmachinelogfilestomlcleafbacklashandeffectofmlcbacklashonclinicaldynamicmlcmotionanexperimentalinvestigation AT standenthereses insensitivityofmachinelogfilestomlcleafbacklashandeffectofmlcbacklashonclinicaldynamicmlcmotionanexperimentalinvestigation AT wolfjoshua insensitivityofmachinelogfilestomlcleafbacklashandeffectofmlcbacklashonclinicaldynamicmlcmotionanexperimentalinvestigation AT greerpeter insensitivityofmachinelogfilestomlcleafbacklashandeffectofmlcbacklashonclinicaldynamicmlcmotionanexperimentalinvestigation AT simpsonjohn insensitivityofmachinelogfilestomlcleafbacklashandeffectofmlcbacklashonclinicaldynamicmlcmotionanexperimentalinvestigation |