EPID在VMAT技术验收测试中的应用研究

目的 采用EPID实现直线加速器VMAT技术的验收研究。方法 采用Shaper及Eclipse TPS编辑并利用EPID对TrueBeam加速器VMAT技术中MLC到位精度、临床剂量等核心内容进行测试。测试例:TA:机架在0°、90°、270°时分别曝光0.5 cm×20.0 cm狭缝野;TB:不同剂量率及机架角速度组合时射野平坦度稳定性;TC:静态及旋转状态下MLC到位精度;TD:静态及旋转状态下MLC变速控制准确性;TE:加速器同时变剂量率及机架旋转速度的准确性;TF:临床病例。利用Matlab对测试结果进行分析。结果 0°、90°、270°测得狭缝叠加后半高宽与零度时半高宽差别均为0.39 mm。TB结果显示射野平坦度差别<0.5%。TC测试显示EPID测得的狭缝中心与TPS设定的中心最大偏差为0.45 mm。TD测试显示MLC位置实测值与TPS设定值差别最大为0.69 mm。TE结果显示各狭缝相互间差别最大为0.42 mm。临床病例以3%/3 mm标准评价时γ通过率最低为96.4%。结论 利用EPID能准确、便捷的完成VMAT技术验收,此方法为减轻物理师工作负担提供了一个良好选择。     

基于EPID和EBT3胶片剂量计对动态MLC叶片到位精度检测研究

目的 建立一种使用EPID和EBT3胶片剂量计进行动态MLC叶片到位精度的快速准确检测方法。方法 美国瓦里安6 MV加速器的固定机架角和准直器角度为0°,共设计11个MLC以滑窗方式运行的射野,每个射野由一组相同宽度的窄条野组成,窄条野的宽度为1~10 mm,窄条野之间的间距为2 cm。使用EPID、EBT3胶片剂量计作为测量工具,刻度设计窄条野宽度(带宽)与测量带宽的半高宽的关系。以同样方式设计一带宽为5 mm射野,并在不同位置设计几处MLC叶片偏差,通过EPID、EBT3分析MLC叶片到位精度。结果 当设计带宽>4 mm时,可很好地线性拟合设计带宽与实测带宽的半高宽。EPID检测带宽、峰值间距、MLC叶片位置的精度分别为±0.2、±0.1、±0.1 mm,EBT3检测的分别为±0.3、±0.2、±0.2 mm。结论 提供了一种使用EPID或EBT3胶片剂量计快速检测MLC实际到位精度的方法,为MLC的QA提供帮助。     

加速器运行误差对盆腔肿瘤容积旋转调强放疗计划剂量验证的影响

目的 研究加速器机架旋转角度、机器跳数(MU)、准直器到位和多叶准直器(MLC)叶片到位等误差对容积旋转调强放疗(VMAT)计划剂量验证γ通过率的影响。方法 选取已行VMAT的直肠癌和宫颈癌各10例,分别引入加速器各参数运行误差。通过比较引入误差计划与临床计划的剂量验证γ通过率,分析各参数误差对γ通过率的影响及其敏感性。结果 评价指标取3%/3mm、3%/2mm和2%/2mm时,引入机架旋转误差、机器跳数误差和准直器到位误差后的直肠癌和宫颈癌计划相比临床计划的剂量验证γ通过率变化均<7.0%,引入两侧MLC叶片反向、相向、同向运动误差后,每毫米误差导致绝对剂量验证γ通过率变化分别<19.13%、18.53%、0.19%,19.87%、20.01%、0.42%和23.11%、23.45%、0.65%。结论 执行VMAT计划时,相比机架旋转角度误差、机器跳数误差、准直器到位误差和MLC叶片同向偏移误差,MLC叶片反向或相向运动误差对绝对剂量验证γ通过率的影响更加明显,评价指标取3%/3mm、3%/2mm和2%/2mm时绝对剂量验证γ通过率受加速器各参数误差影响依次递增。执行特定患者剂量验证时,应适当使用评价指标并以绝对剂量验证γ通过率为评估计算和测量剂量分布一致性的参考指标。     

VMAT模式下MLC叶片运动速度对到位误差影响

目的 探讨RapidArc模式下MLC叶片运动速度对叶片到位误差的影响,完善RapidArc QA方案,验证RapidArc可靠性。方法 参考PicketFenceStatic_M120.dcm、PicketFenceRA_M120.dcm文件,设计模拟相邻叶片不同速度的Tilt测试,分析EPID图像得出叶片到位误差。结果 静态机架和RapidArc模式下,Tilt测试中gap11~gap50的位置误差都逐渐增大。机架270°时gap41误差最大,为-0.55 mm。RapidArc模式下gap46误差最大,为-0.67 mm。所有模式下gap宽度偏差均≤15%。对比4个固定机架角度的宽度偏差图形几乎相似,每个条纹相同gap处宽度偏差呈现一致趋势。与静态机架模式下gap宽度偏差百分比相比,RapidArc模式下的波动更大。结论 随MLC叶片速度增加,到位误差随之增大。叶片速度不同并未对gap宽度造成明显影响,不同叶片速度形成的gap宽度偏差无规律。4个固定机架角度下gap宽度偏差图像相似,说明gap宽度偏差与叶片本身有关,与机架所处角度几乎无关。RapidArc模式比固定机架模式对gap宽度影响更大。     

半导体矩阵在HT加速器同步性测试中应用

目的 探讨如何使用ArcCHECK完成HT同步性测试。方法 根据AAPM 148号报告测试HT同步性参数,即机架角度一致性、治疗床匀速运动、治疗床运动和机架旋转同步性。(1)机架角度一致性:将ArcCHECK通过虚拟等中心摆位,使其长轴垂直于旋转平面;照射序列使用25 mm的铅门宽度, 螺距为0.1的40圈旋转照射;叶片控制正弦图设置中央两片叶片(第32、33片)于机架投射角度为0°、120°和240°时打开。(2)治疗床匀速运动:将ArcCHECK固定于治疗床上,长轴沿床运动方向摆位;编辑照射序列,使用临床常用的床运动速度(0.3~0.5 mm/s)运动200 mm,机架角度固定于0°、铅门宽度10 mm、叶片全部打开进行照射。(3)治疗床运动和机架旋转同步性:使用10 mm铅门宽度、螺距为1的13圈旋转照射;叶片控制正弦图第2、7、12圈照射时,叶片于半周全开,其他时刻均为关闭状态。最初采集数据后作为基线,后续测量与其进行比较,采用点对点剂量差别分析方法,1%标准评价差异水平。结果 机架角度一致性可以检测治疗开始时刻机架初始角度准确性及每圈旋转同一角度重复投照能力。ArcCHECK软件界面内将获得6条平行的直性高剂量区域。床匀速测试中软件内高剂量区域内,长轴方向相对剂量变化<2%。治疗床运动和机架旋转同步性测量结果在软件界面中获得间距相等的3条平行高剂量区域。第2、7、12圈照射时28次同步性测试通过率分别为93.2%±1.5%、93.7%±1.1%、93.5%±1.3%。结论 ArcCHECK1次摆位即可完成所有测试,与使用胶片相比降低工作量的同时节约成本,可作为除胶片外HT同步性测试的另一选择。     

多种三维剂量验证系统在肺癌VMAT剂量验证中的联合应用

目的 联合应用两种商用及一种自行开发的基于加速器轨迹日志(LFB)的三维剂量重建系统验证肺癌VMAT计划。方法 编程实现读取TrueBeam轨迹日志中误差并导入计划系统生成重建剂量。选18例肺癌双弧VMAT计划,用ArcCheck测量并利用3DVH重建,同时使用LFB和Compass计算模式重建。其中5例4h内由ArcCheck测2次,检测加速器重复性。将18例计划移植到建成5cm、背散4cm、中心放置有FC65-G电离室的固体水模上计算电离室平均剂量并与实测及3种重建系统重建点剂量比对。结果 加速器重复性稳定。LFB、3DVH、Compass及FC-65G实测与计划点剂量偏差≤2%。ArcCheck曲面二维,3DVH、Compass整体及LBF所有器官三维γ通过率在所有比对标准下均>90%,3DVH及Compass个别器官γ通过率低。重建剂量与原计划相比,LBF差异最小,除肺之外器官Compass差异居中、3DVH最大。结论 LBF、3DVH、Compass 3种系统能从不同方面反映肺癌VMAT剂量验证结果,联合应用三者进行剂量验证能更直观的展现出验证结果,便于后续分析。     

动态多叶准直器精度对调强放疗的剂量学影响和容差研究

目的 定量研究多叶准直器(MLC)位置误差对固定野动态调强放疗(dMLC-IMRT)计划的剂量学影响,为该治疗技术确立MLC质控精度和运行容差提供指导。方法 模体研究使用计划系统中建立以5、10、20mm为子野宽度的三组条形10cm×10cm动态滑窗测试野计划。患者计划抽取7种常见肿瘤的临床治疗计划,包括鼻咽癌、胶质瘤、肺癌、食管癌、宫颈癌、前列腺癌和乳腺癌,每种 6例。模拟MLC误差包括系统性开/关误差、系统性偏移误差和随机误差,对原计划引入MLC误差生成模拟计划,比较原计划和模拟计划的剂量学差异。结果 模体研究结果表明剂量偏差与系统性开/关误差成正比,与子野宽度成反比;系统性偏移误差导致积分剂量的整体偏移,对射野中心剂量无影响。患者计划研究结果表明系统性开/关误差对剂量学有影响,7种常见肿瘤计划靶区的剂量敏感性为 7.258~13.743%/mm,剂量敏感度与平均子野宽度负相关;系统性偏移误差引起的每毫米剂量学偏差均<2%;2mm以下随机误差时引起的剂量学变化在临床上可忽略不计。结论 对于行固定野动态IMRT计划宜限制子野最小宽度,而加速器端应加强对MLC的质控。为了确保靶区剂量的不确定度<3%,支持2mm随机误差应作为固定野动态IMRT时的运行容差,0.2mm每侧或0.4mm单侧的对齐精度作为质控精度以保证不同肿瘤的放疗剂量准确性。     

1.5T 磁共振加速器X线束剂量学特性测试

目的 由于磁场会改变次级电子运动轨迹,继而影响剂量场分布,磁共振加速器(MR-Linac) X线束剂量学特性与常规加速器有差别。本项目旨在测量和分析1.5T MR-Linac的X线束剂量学特性。方法 中国医学科学院肿瘤医院于2019年5月安装1台瑞典医科达公司Unity型1.5T MR-Linac,使用磁场兼容工具对其进行测量,测量项目包括表面剂量、最大剂量点深度、射线质、离轴比曲线(OAR)中心位置、对称性、半影宽度、不同机架角度的输出量变化。结果 不同射野面积的平均表面剂量为40.48%,平均最大剂量点深度为1.25cm。10cm×10cm射野面积下,x轴方向的OAR中心位置往x₂侧偏移1.47mm,对称性为101.33%,两侧半影宽度分别为6.86mm和7.14mm;y轴方向的OAR中心位置偏移0.3mm,对称性为100.85%,两侧半影宽度分别为5.92mm和5.95mm。不同机架角度下输出量最大偏差达1.50%。结论 与常规加速器不同,MR-Linac不同射野面积表面剂量数值趋于一致,最大剂量点深度上升。x轴方向的OAR中心位置往x₂侧偏移,造成对称性变差和半影不对称。不同机架角度下的输出量变化明显,需要修正。     

应用EPID代替胶片法对MLC的质控研究

目的 研究EPID代替胶片对加速器MLC的质控方法并探讨其在任意机架角度下的可行性。方法 采用RIT113软件对EPID影像和EBT3胶片影像数据进行分析。以EBT3胶片射野边缘50%等剂量曲线位置定义MLC叶片实际位置,在同一射野条件下EPID影像数据中找到MLC叶片实际位置所对应百分剂量值,从而完成EPID到EBT3胶片的替代过程。结果 加速器机架角0°时,以EBT3胶片确定的MLC叶片位置处EPID影像对应的期望百分剂量值为44%,最大MLC位置误差为0.12 mm。任意机架角度时,EPID影像数据通过与0°结果做距离一致性分析比对,半径为0.5 mm时所有像素点均通过。结论 采用EPID代替胶片对加速器MLC叶片到位质控方法可行,且其精度满足临床要求并适用于任意机架角的测量,具有广泛推广和借鉴意义。     

高分辨多叶准直器HD-MLC的Edge加速器TPS模型建立及测试

目的 探讨配备HD-MLC的Edge加速器Eclipse模型建立与测试。方法 利用Razor、CC13采集小野百分深度剂量、离轴曲线、输出因子并与标准数据比对。使用EBT3、EPID、 SRS1000&SRS1500测量MLC半影、穿射漏射、凹凸槽、到位准确性、DLG,并根据测试例γ通过率选出最佳DLG/透射率值。利用 FC65-G对规则野、IMRT、VMAT病例行点剂量验证。使用Octavius 4D及EBT3对测试例行面剂量验证。结果 实测PDD与标准数据一致。3、4 cm射野半影较标准值小,6 cm的较标准值大。所有方野左右边界、射野大小、射野中心偏差分布为-1.0~0.4 mm、0.2~1.7 mm、-0.3~1.9 mm、-0.1~0.8 mm。左、右MLC在不同位置处的半影平均值分别为(2.5±0.042)、(2.7±0.005) mm;MLC透射率分布为 0.009~0.016。测得的DLG、透射因子分别为0.1861 cm、0.0116,最佳DLG、透射因子分别为0.015 cm、0.014。除 1例位于低剂量区外,其余所有测试点剂量偏差均位于 ±3%内。IMRT面剂量验证局部、全局γ通过率分别为 79.81%~100%、96.3%~100%(3%/3 mm),VMAT病例上述通过率分别为 71.3%~98.9%、94.3%~99.8%。结论 本研究方法能准确地实施HD-MLC&Edge系统Eclipse模型建立与测试。     

Evaluation of multi-leaf collimator performance of TrueBeam accelerator using high-resolution trajectory log files

Objective To evaluate the multi-leaf collimator (MLC) performance of TrueBeam accelerator using trajectory log files. Methods All tests were performed 5 times under different gantry-collimator angle combination. The 1 mm picket fences were constructed by static or dynamic MLC. The control ability for small-field accuracy of accelerator was evaluated. Repeatability was assessed by MLC repeat motion. The movement performance of difference velocities along one direction and the opposite direction were evaluated via a 1 cm picket fences which slipped from -7 cm to 7 cm with a uniform velocity and stopped or immediately back at 7 cm. The MLC performance in a complex program was evaluated by a cross movement test. Results Both the static and the dynamic picket fences yielded high accuracy. The deviation spectrums of MLC in different gantry angle were consistent, however, an absolute difference of 0.0011 mm was found. For uniform velocity movement tests with 0°gantry, the RMSE of MLC was increased from 0.0150 mm to 0.0598 mm when the speed was accelerated from 5 mm/s to 25 mm/s. Similar results were obtained in non-zero gantry angle. The “overspeed” effect caused by the direction change movement of MLC was less obvious than that caused by speed changed from zero to a uniform velocity movement state. There was no significant change in speed before and after the MLC crossing. The MLC speed fluctuated around the set value, which was independent of the gantry angle. Conclusion A method for evaluating the performance of MLC using trajectory log files is established, which can evaluate the MLC performance of TrueBeam accelerator and be used for MLC rapid quality control in clinical practice.     

Impact of accelerator operating errors on γ passing rate during dose verification of volumetric modulated arc therapy for pelvic tumors

Objective To investigate the impacts of gantry rotation angle errors, monitor unit (MU) errors, collimator and multi-leaf collimator (MLC) position errors upon the γ passing rate of dose verification in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Methods Ten patients with rectal cancer and 10 patients with uterine tumors were selected. The operating errors of accelerator parameters were introduced during the VMAT execution. By comparing the γ passing rates during dose verification between the simulating and original plans, the impact and sensitivity of the operating errors of each accelerator parameter on γ passing rate were analyzed. Results When the γ criteria were set as 3%/3mm, 3%/2mm and 2%/2mm, the γ passing rate decreasing gradient was less than 7.0% after the introduction of gantry rotation angle, MU and collimator position errors, respectively. However, after the reverse, opposite, and co-directional motion errors of the MLC blades on both sides were introduced,the γ passing rate decreasing was less than 19.13 %, 18.53%, 0.19 %; 19.87%, 20.01%, 0.42 % and 23.11%, 23.45%,0.65 % for absolute dose verification, respectively. Conclusion During VMAT, the reverse and opposite motion errors of MLC blades exert more significant effect on the γ passing rate compared with the gantry rotation angle errors, MU errors, collimator position errors and co-directional motion errors of the MLC blades. When the γ criteria of 3%/3mm, 3%/2mm and 2%/2mm are adopted, the impact of accelerator operating errors upon the γ passing rate is strengthened in sequence. Therefore, when performing dose verification for a specific patient, appropriate γ criteria should be chosen and absolute dose verification should be taken as the reference index to evaluate the consistency between the calculated and measured dose distribution.     

Initial experience with TrueBeam trajectory log files for radiation therapy delivery verification

PurposeTraditionally, initial and weekly chart checks involve checking various parameters in the treatment management system against the expected treatment parameters and machine settings. This process is time-consuming and labor intensive. We explore utilizing the Varian TrueBeam log files (Varian Medical System, Palo Alto, CA), which contain the complete delivery parameters for an end-to-end verification of daily patient treatments.Methods and MaterialsAn in-house software tool for 3-dimensional (3D) conformal therapy, enhanced dynamic wedge delivery, intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), volumetric modulated radiation therapy, flattening filter-free mode, and electron therapy treatment verification was developed. The software reads the Varian TrueBeam log files, extracts the delivered parameters, and compares them against the original treatment planning data. In addition to providing an end-to-end data transfer integrity check, the tool also verifies the accuracy of treatment deliveries. This is performed as part of the initial chart check for IMRT plans and after first fraction for the 3D plans. The software was validated for consistency and accuracy for IMRT and 3D fields.ResultsBased on the validation results the accuracy of MLC, jaw and gantry positions were well within the expected values. The patient quality assurance results for 127 IMRT patients and 51 conventional fields were within 0.25 mm for multileaf collimator positions, 0.3 degree for gantry angles, 0.13 monitor units for monitor unit delivery accuracy, and 1 mm for jaw positions. The delivered dose rates for the flattening filter-free modes were within 1% of the planned dose rates.ConclusionsThe end-to-end data transfer check using TrueBeam log files and the treatment delivery parameter accuracy check provides an efficient, reliable beam parameter check process for various radiation delivery techniques.     

瓦里安Halcyon加速器的安装验收测试

目的:通过安装验收测试(IPA)了解掌握瓦里安新型Halcyon加速器的构造、性能、验收测试和质控方法。方法:参考瓦里安提供的IPA手册,AAPM TG-142 C形臂加速器质控和TG-148 tomotherapy质控标准,测试并验收Halcyon的软件授权、安全联锁、机械精度、射束性能、成像系统等,并与传统True...     

机器性能检查系统在加速器的应用评估

目的 验证Varian公司TrueBeam系列加速器机器性能检查(MPC)系统的可靠性、精确度与稳定性。方法 装机完成后通过验收数据与第1次MPC运行的结果进行比较,验证MPC结果可靠性;通过人为引入误差的方法验证MPC结果在图像引导放疗应用中的精确度。收集2019—2020年间60组MPC部分结果求,比较各指标稳定性差异。结果 MPC获得的设备误差参数均低于验收获得的误差参数,两者数据差异最大仅为2mm且占阈值比<20%。MPC对辐射和成像位置偏移的感应精度较高,r值均>90%;其中治疗床Vertical方向对位移精度感应较差,r值<73.7%。对于此次验证指标稳定性最好的为治疗床角度方向,标准差均≤0.01,其余各指标稳定性差异不大。结论 MPC可以作为图像引导放疗常规质量保证的一种验证工具,对于辐射、成像等中心的验证精度优于机架、准直器和治疗床的机械精度。