gamma index

Gamma 指数
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:随着放射治疗技术的进步,多目标颅内SRS病例的规划方法也是如此。多目标单等中心(MTSI)规划提供了高精度的波束传输,缩短了持续时间。然而,使用像SRSMapCHECK(SRSMC)这样的QA设备在单个患者特定质量保证(PSQA)中适应所有目标通常是不切实际的。
    目标:因此,我们进行了PSQA,使用自定义脚本,通过相对于PSQA设备上的波束等中心点重新定位每个目标或相邻目标组(T-NTG),确保每个目标的剂量覆盖高精度。
    方法:SRS治疗计划使用6MV-FFF波束,由四个体积调制ARC治疗(VMAT)弧组成,包括一个全弧形和三个带沙发踢的半弧形。自定义脚本计算T-NTG相对于光束等中心点的坐标。为每个T-NTG创建了QA验证计划,重新定义波束等中心点,以便与SRSMC的中心精确对准。在PSQA期间获取CBCT图像,用于SRSMC对齐,并进行了伽马指数分析(GIA)。单尾配对t检验评估了75个QA验证计划的通过率(PR)。
    结果:每个质量保证计划的1.0mm/2.0%标准的GIA产生的PR>95.5%,平均为98.9%。实现PR>99.0%和>97.0%的计划占研究计划的63%和92%,分别。在t检验中观察到统计学显著性,理想PR值为100%,虽然发现PR值为99%时微不足道,这表明单个目标的PSQA始终接近99%PR。在使用6MV-FFF梁的MTSI情况下,横向剂量下降区域内的目标需要仔细验证是否可接受性。我们对个体T-NTG重新定位的临床研究表明,提出的PSQA方法通常是可以接受的,由一个统计上不显著的PR支持,而PR值为99%。
    结论:所提供的统计分析结果表明,拟议的PSQA方法可以作为临床环境中的可靠工具。
    BACKGROUND: As radiotherapy techniques advance, so do planning methods for multi-target intracranial SRS cases. Multi-target-single-isocenter (MTSI) planning offers high-precision beam delivery with shortened duration. However, accommodating all targets in a single Patient-Specific-Quality-Assurance (PSQA) with QA devices like SRS MapCHECK (SRS MC) is generally impractical.
    OBJECTIVE: Consequently, we conducted PSQA, using a custom script, by relocating each Target or Neighboring-Target-Group (T-NTG) relative to the beam isocenter on the PSQA device, ensuring each target\'s dose coverage at high precision.
    METHODS: SRS treatment plans use 6MV-FFF beams, consisting of four Volumetric Modulated ARC Therapy (VMAT) arcs, including one full-arc and three half arcs with couch-kicks. A custom script calculated T-NTG coordinates relative to the beam isocenter. QA verification plans were created for each T-NTG, redefining the beam isocenter for precise alignment with the center of the SRS MC. CBCT images were acquired during PSQA for SRS MC alignment, and gamma-index analysis (GIA) was performed. A single-tail paired t-test assessed the passing rate (PR) for 75 QA verification plans.
    RESULTS: GIA with l.0 mm/2.0% criteria for each QA plan yielded a PR > 95.5%, with an average of 98.9%. Plans achieving PR > 99.0% and > 97.0% constituted 63% and 92% of studied plans, respectively. Statistical significance was observed in a t-test with an ideal PR value of 100%, while insignificance was found with a PR value of 99%, suggesting that PSQA for individual targets consistently approaches 99% PR. In MTSI cases using 6MV-FFF beams, targets within the lateral dose-fall-off region require careful verification for acceptability. Our clinical study on individual T-NTG relocation demonstrates that the presented PSQA methods are generally acceptable, supported by a statistically insignificant PR against a 99% PR value.
    CONCLUSIONS: Presented statistical analysis results indicate that the proposed PSQA approach can serve as a reliable tool in clinical settings.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:表征探测器阵列间距和伽玛指数,以保证立体定向放射外科(SRS)分娩的质量保证(QA)。使用奈奎斯特定理确定SRS字段中所需的检测器间距,并使用SRSMapCHECK找到最佳的伽马指数来检测MLC错误,ArcCHECK,和射野成像装置(EPID)。
    方法:通过对典型SRS治疗计划的小辐射场和轮廓的傅立叶分析来确定所需的检测器间距。评估了0.5、1和2mm的MLC误差的临床影响。使用协议距离和剂量差的各种组合评估了三个检测器系统的全局伽马(低剂量阈值10%)。
    结果:虽然MLC错误仅对PTV和2毫米厚的周围结构(PTV_2毫米)的平均剂量产生轻微影响,随着最大剂量增加到PTV_2mm,出现显著的PTV剂量不足。对于目标体积为3.2cm3(计划3cc)和35.02cm3(计划35cc)的计划,在95%的容差水平下,对引入的误差具有最高敏感性的Gamma指数对于SRSMapCHECK为2%/1mm,对于ArcCHECK为2%/3mm。EPID为3%/1毫米(计划3cc)和2%/1毫米(计划35cc)。2mmMLC误差的合格率下降为(46.2%,41.6%)对于SRSMapCHECK和(12.2%,4.2%)用于计划3cc和计划35cc的ArcCHECK,分别。对于门户剂量,值分别为4.5%(计划3cc)和7%(计划35cc)。两个SRS剂量分布的奈奎斯特频率介于0.26和0.1mm-1之间,对应于1.9和5毫米的探测器间距。对探测器密度加倍的SRSMapCHECK数据的评估表明,增加的探测器密度可能会降低系统对错误的敏感性,需要更严格的伽马指数。
    结论:目前的结果提供了有关SRSQA期间所研究探测器的探测器阵列性能和伽马指数的见解。
    OBJECTIVE: To characterize detector array spacing and gamma index for quality assurance (QA) of stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) deliveries. Use the Nyquist theorem to determine the required detector spacing in SRS fields, and find optimal gamma indices to detect MLC errors using the SRS MapCHECK, ArcCHECK, and a portal imaging device (EPID).
    METHODS: The required detector spacing was determined via Fourier analysis of small radiation fields and profiles of typical SRS treatment plans. The clinical impact of MLC errors of 0.5, 1, and 2 mm was evaluated. Global gamma (low-dose threshold 10%) was evaluated for the three detector systems using various combinations of the distance to agreement and the dose difference.
    RESULTS: While MLC errors only slightly affected mean dose to PTV and a 2 mm thick surrounding structure (PTV_2 mm), significant PTV underdose incurred with increase in maximum dose to PTV_2 mm. Gamma indices with highest sensitivity to the introduced errors at 95% tolerance level for plans on target volumes of 3.2 cm3 (plan 3 cc) and 35.02 cm3 (plan 35 cc) were 2%/1 mm for the SRS MapCHECK and 2%/3 mm for the ArcCHECK, with 3%/1 mm (plan 3cc) and 2%/1 mm (plan 35cc) for the EPID. Drops in passing rates for a 2 mm MLC error were (46.2%, 41.6%) for the SRS MapCHECK and (12.2%, 4.2%) for the ArcCHECK for plan 3cc and plan 35cc, respectively. For Portal Dose, values were 4.5% (plan 3cc) and 7% (plan 35cc). The Nyquist frequency of two SRS dose distributions lie between 0.26  and 0.1 mm-1 , corresponding to detector spacings of 1.9 and 5 mm. Evaluation of SRS MapCHECK data with doubled detector density indicates that increased detector density may reduce the system\'s sensitivity to errors, necessitating a tighter gamma index.
    CONCLUSIONS: The present results give insight on the performance of detector arrays and gamma indices for the investigated detectors during SRS QA.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在放射治疗中使用虚拟楔形(VW)来补偿缺失的组织并在组织中产生均匀的剂量分布。根据TECDOC-1583和技术报告系列编号。430、评估剂量计算精度对于治疗计划系统(TPS)的质量保证至关重要。在这项研究中,通过比较VW视野中的计算剂量和测量剂量,评估了塌陷锥叠加(CCS)算法在乳腺癌胸壁切除术后放疗中的剂量计算精度。
    在胸部幻像中使用ISOgrayTPS计划了具有典型VW角度的两个切向场。CCS算法用于6和15MV光子束的剂量计算。使用伽马指数评估从EBT3膜空间和TPS获得的剂量分布。
    在具有不同束能量的异质介质中使用VW测得的和计算的剂量值彼此吻合良好(接受率:88.0%-93.4%)。随着楔角的增加/减少,计算和测量的数据没有显着差异。此外,结果表明,ISOgray高估和低估了计划体积中软组织和肺的剂量,分别。
    根据伽马指数分析的结果,在异质环境中使用VW模型和CCS算法计算的剂量分布在可接受范围内.
    UNASSIGNED: Virtual wedge (VW) is used in radiotherapy to compensate for missing tissues and create a uniform dose distribution in tissues. According to TECDOC-1583 and technical reports series no. 430, evaluating the dose calculation accuracy is essential for the quality assurance of treatment planning systems (TPSs). In this study, the dose calculation accuracy of the collapsed cone superposition (CCS) algorithm in the postmastectomy radiotherapy of the chest wall for breast cancer was evaluated by comparing the calculated and measured dose in VW fields.
    UNASSIGNED: Two tangential fields with the typical VW angles were planned using ISOgray TPS in a thorax phantom. The CCS algorithm was used for dose calculation at 6 and 15 MV photon beams. The obtained dose distributions from EBT3 film spaces and TPS were evaluated using the gamma index.
    UNASSIGNED: The measured and calculated dose values using VW in a heterogeneous medium with different beam energies were in a good agreement with each other (acceptance rate: 88.0%-93.4%). The calculated and measured data did not differ significantly with an increase/decrease in wedge angle. In addition, the results demonstrated that ISOgray overestimated and underestimated the dose of the soft tissue and lung in the planned volume, respectively.
    UNASSIGNED: According to the results of gamma index analysis, the calculated dose distribution using VW model with the CCS algorithm in a heterogeneous environment was within acceptable limits.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    在本研究中,目的探讨骨盆内剂量调节的放疗方案,以减少骨盆区放疗患者的皮肤剂量。选择45例盆腔癌患者的系列图像,调强放射治疗(IMRT)计划,优化了皮肤剂量减少,并评估验证计划验证。因此,接受IMRT皮肤计划剂量≥10、≥20、≥30、≥40和≥50Gy的皮肤体积均小于IMRT计划。特别是,接受皮肤IMRT计划剂量≥20、≥30、≥40和≥50Gy的皮肤体积明显低于IMRT计划,还原值分别为8.76、18.83、46.84和100%,分别。此外,皮肤IMRT计划不再受到50Gy剂量的影响.总之,本研究表明,通过最佳计划处理可以降低皮肤剂量;因此,这种皮肤剂量的减少确保了放疗的继续和改善患者的生活质量。
    In the present study, it was aimed to investigate the optimized plan of radiotherapy with dose modulation in the pelvis to reduce the dose on the skin in patients having pelvic region radiotherapy. The series of images of 45 pelvic cancer patients were selected, intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plan was made, the skin dose reduction was optimized, and evaluated verifying the plan verification. As a result, skin volume receiving dose ≥10, ≥20, ≥30, ≥40 and ≥50 Gy of the IMRT Skin plan were all less than those of the IMRT plan. Particularly, skin volumes receiving doses ≥20, ≥30, ≥40 and ≥50 Gy of the Skin IMRT plan were markedly lower than those of the IMRT plan, the reduction values were 8.76, 18.83, 46.84 and 100%, respectively. Furthermore, the Skin IMRT plan was no longer affected by the 50 Gy dose. In conclusion, the present study revealed that the skin\'s dose can be decreased with optimal plan processing; thus, this decrease of the skin\'s dose ensures the continuation of radiotherapy and improved life quality of the patient.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    UNASSIGNED:大多数近距离放射治疗治疗计划系统(TPS)的调试都需要基于美国医学物理学家协会任务组-43形式主义的数据输入。调试精度对于剂量计算非常重要。这项研究的目的是在临床环境中实施近距离放射治疗TPS,并检查TPS计算的剂量准确性。
    UNASSIGNED:引入不同导管的数据后(CISBioInternational,Saclay,法国),由几种铯-137埃克特和齐格勒BEBIGCSM-11放射源组成;对于XiO(CMS,圣路易斯)近距离放射治疗TPS,通过比较所有导管的TPS计算剂量分布(DD)与(1)使用EBT3GAFChromic薄膜测量DD和(2)通过egs_brachy计算DD(电子伽玛淋浴,加拿大国家研究委员会)蒙特卡洛模拟。用于本研究的体模由六个PTW平板30cm×30cm×1cm的聚甲基丙烯酸甲酯组成,顶部装有DeloucheMEDpro涂抹器。在该体模的计算机断层扫描扫描上计算TPSDD。
    未经批准:PTWVeriSoft6.0.1.7版(PTW-Freiburg,德国)软件用于分析扫描的胶片,并根据伽马指数分布进行比较。
    未授权:对于每个导管,在两种验证方法中,伽马指数分布显示>95%的所有像素一致,gamma≤1。
    UNASSIGNED:我们确认了调试的准确性,并且TPS可用于临床目的。
    UNASSIGNED: Most brachytherapy treatment planning system (TPS) commissioning requires data input based on the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group-43 formalism. The commissioning accuracy is very important for dose calculation. The aim of this study is the implementation of a brachytherapy TPS into a clinical environment and check the TPS calculated dose accuracy.
    UNASSIGNED: After introducing data of the different catheters (CIS Bio International, Saclay, France), composed of several Cesium-137 Eckert and Ziegler BEBIG CSM-11 radioactive sources; for XiO (CMS, St. Louis) brachytherapy TPS, the TPS dose calculation accuracy was investigated by comparing between the TPS calculated dose distribution (DD) for all the catheters with (1) the measuring DD using EBT3 GAFChromic film and (2) calculating DD by egs_brachy (Electron Gamma Shower, National Research Council of Canada) Monte Carlo simulation. The phantom used for this study consists of six PTW slabs 30 cm × 30 cm × 1 cm of polymethyl methacrylate with a Delouche MEDpro applicator on the top. The TPS DD was calculated on the computed tomography scan of this phantom.
    UNASSIGNED: PTW VeriSoft version 6.0.1.7 (PTW-Freiburg, Germany) software was used for analyzing scanned films and to perform the comparison based on the gamma index distribution.
    UNASSIGNED: For each catheter, the gamma index distribution showed agreement >95% of all pixels in both verification methods, with gamma ≤1.
    UNASSIGNED: We confirm the commissioning accuracy and that the TPS can be used for clinical purposes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目标:在立体定向放射治疗计划(SRTP)中开发用于患者特定QA的严格的基于导数的伽马(DBG)指数,以考虑剂量的空间变化。方法:回顾性分析25例肝脏SBRT患者的临床资料。故意,对每位患者使用两种不同的治疗计划方法.首先,治疗计划是使用常规治疗计划(CTP)方法生成的,其中目标被均一剂量覆盖,治疗区域周围的标称剂量减少.随后,其他治疗计划是使用SRTP方法生成的,目的是在目标区域内使用异质剂量,同时尽可能在治疗区域外使用更陡的剂量梯度.对于这两种治疗方案,使用2D离子室阵列和放射变色膜进行二维(2D)常规伽马(CG)和DBG分析。结果:DBG指数差异有统计学意义,对于CG分析,两种治疗方案(CTP和SRTP)的CG指数差异均不显著.对于高伽马标准,DBG指数的差异与HI的差异之间存在显着的正相关。结论:DBG评估更严格,并且对唯一的SRTP敏感。除CG外,建议的方法还可以在常规临床实践中选择。知识进步:DBG对检测剂量的空间变化更敏感,特别是在高剂量梯度区域。
    Objective:The development of a stringent derivative-based gamma (DBG) index for patient-specific QA in stereotactic radiotherapy treatment planning (SRTP) to account for the spatial change in dose.Methods:Twenty-five patients of liver SBRT were selected retrospectively for this study. Deliberately, two different kinds of treatment planning approaches were used for each patient. Firstly, the treatment plans were generated using a conventional treatment planning (CTP) approach in which the target was covered with a homogeneous dose along with the nominal dose fall-off around the treatment field. Subsequently, the other treatment plans were generated using an SRTP approach with the intent of heterogeneous dose within the target region along with a steeper dose gradient outside the treatment field as much as possible. For both kinds of treatment plans, two dimensional (2D) conventional gamma (CG) and DBG analysis were performed using the 2D ion chamber array and radiochromic film.Results:Difference in the DBG index was statistically significant whereas, for CG analysis, the difference in CG index was insignificant for both types of treatment plans (CTP and SRTP). A significant positive correlation was observed between the difference in the DBG index and the difference in HI for high gamma criteria.Conclusion:The DBG evaluation is found to be more rigorous, and sensitive to the only SRTP. The proposed method could be opted-in the routine clinical practice in addition to CG.Advances in knowledge:DBG is more sensitive to detect the spatial change of dose, especially in high dose gradient regions.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:通过伽玛指数(GI)和剂量-体积直方图(DVH)指标常规评估针对其相应的放射治疗计划所测量的剂量分布的质量。错误检测率之间的任何相关性,基于这些方法中的任何一种,虽然争论,从未令人信服地证明过。尚未系统地研究GI通过率(γP)和DVH质量保证(QA)指标之间的相关性强度对治疗计划各个要素的依赖性。
    方法:对γP和DVH指标之间的关系进行了形式化分析,导致与DVH可能部分接近γP的关系。通过研究模拟临床放疗计划的实例,并通过使用计划目标体积(PTV)和危险器官(OAR)的简单二维表示研究γP与推导关系之间的相关性,进一步验证了这种关系。在半影区域,距离-协议公差和剂量输送误差是系统变化的.
    结果:正式显示,γP与其他常用的DVH衍生的QA度量之间不存在任何相关性。然而,在给定计划和测量的DVH的情况下,γP可以部分近似。推导出的γP近似值(“γ-斜率指标”)在某些放射治疗计划QA的实际情况下可能在临床上有用。
    结论:在正式术语中,γP与任何常见的DVH计算的患者特定指标之间不存在任何相关性,关于PTV或OAR。然而,正如我们的模拟研究中分析和进一步证实的那样,本研究中得出的γP近似值("γ-斜率指标")在某些情况下,在测量和计划的患者特定剂量分布中,γP与PTV和OARDVHQA指标之间存在一定程度的相关性,这在临床实践中可能有用.
    OBJECTIVE: The quality of a measured distribution of dose delivered against its corresponding radiotherapy plan is routinely assessed by gamma index (GI) and dose-volume histogram (DVH) metrics. Any correlation between error detection rates, as based on either of these approaches, while argued, has never been convincingly demonstrated. The dependence of the strength of correlation between the GI passing rate ( γ P ) and DVH quality assurance (QA) metrics on various elements of the therapy plan has not been systematically investigated.
    METHODS: A formal analysis of the relation between γ P and DVH metrics has been undertaken, leading to a relationship which may partly approximate γ P with respect to the DVH. This relationship was further validated by studying examples of simulated clinical radiotherapy plans and by studying the correlation between γ P and the derived relationship using a simple two-dimensional representations of the planning target volume (PTV) and organs at risk (OAR), where penumbra regions, distance-to-agreement tolerances and dose delivery errors were systematically varied.
    RESULTS: It is shown formally that there cannot be any correlation between γ P and other commonly applied DVH-derived QA measures. However, γ P may be partly approximated given the planned and measured DVH. The derived γ P approximation (the \" γ -slope indicator\") may be clinically useful in some practical cases of radiotherapy plan QA.
    CONCLUSIONS: In formal terms, there cannot be any correlation between γ P and any common DVH-calculated patient-specific measures, with respect to PTV or OAR. However, as demonstrated analytically and further confirmed in our simulation studies, the γ P approximation derived in this study (the \" γ -slope indicator\") may in some cases offer a degree of correlation between γ P and the PTV and OAR DVH QA metrics in measured and planned patient-specific dose distributions-which may be potentially useful in clinical practice.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    本研究旨在验证AcurosXB(AXB)(AXB,瓦里安医疗系统PaloAltoCA,美国),基于两个模型的算法,与前列腺的各向异性分析算法(AAA)计算相比,通过体积调制电弧疗法(VMAT)治疗头颈部和肺癌,没有对AA进行初步修改。目前,我们部门在临床上使用了众所周知且经过验证的AA算法,用于不同病理的VMAT治疗。AXB无需额外测量即可替换它。所递送的剂量的治疗结果和准确性取决于剂量计算算法。
    使用Eclipse版本15.0.4治疗计划系统(TPS)生成了针对不同病理的95个复杂VMAT计划。使用AA和AXB计算剂量分布(剂量对水,AXBw和剂量对培养基,AXBm),所有VMAT计划的计划参数相同。计算每个计划目标体积(PTV)和涉及的危险器官(OAR)的剂量学参数。Octavius®-4D幻影已针对不同算法验证了所有VMAT计划的患者特定质量保证。
    AA,AXBw和AXBm,关于前列腺,头颈部低于1%的PTVD95%。然而,由机管局计算的PTVD95%倾向于高估,在肺部治疗的情况下,相对剂量差异为3.23%。相对差值的绝对平均值分别为1.1±1.2%和2.0±1.2%,当比较AXBW和AA时,AXBm和AA,分别。在AA和AXBm的体积3D分析的大多数情况下,对于测量和计算的剂量,观察到伽马通过率超过97.4%和99.4%,分别。
    该研究表明,使用AXBm算法计算的对培养基的剂量优于AAA,可以在临床上使用。将剂量计算算法从AA切换到AXB不需要额外的测量。
    UNASSIGNED: This study aimed to verify the dosimetric impact of Acuros XB (AXB) (AXB, Varian Medical Systems Palo Alto CA, USA), a two model-based algorithm, in comparison with Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA ) calculations for prostate, head and neck and lung cancer treatment by volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT ), without primary modification to AA. At present, the well-known and validated AA algorithm is clinically used in our department for VMAT treatments of different pathologies. AXB could replace it without extra measurements. The treatment result and accuracy of the dose delivered depend on the dose calculation algorithm.
    UNASSIGNED: Ninety-five complex VMAT plans for different pathologies were generated using the Eclipse version 15.0.4 treatment planning system (TPS). The dose distributions were calculated using AA and AXB (dose-to-water, AXBw and dose-to-medium, AXBm), with the same plan parameters for all VMAT plans. The dosimetric parameters were calculated for each planning target volume (PTV) and involved organs at risk (OA R). The patient specific quality assurance of all VMAT plans has been verified by Octavius®-4D phantom for different algorithms.
    UNASSIGNED: The relative differences among AA, AXBw and AXBm, with respect to prostate, head and neck were less than 1% for PTV D95%. However, PTV D95% calculated by AA tended to be overestimated, with a relative dose difference of 3.23% in the case of lung treatment. The absolute mean values of the relative differences were 1.1 ± 1.2% and 2.0 ± 1.2%, when comparing between AXBw and AA, AXBm and AA, respectively. The gamma pass rate was observed to exceed 97.4% and 99.4% for the measured and calculated doses in most cases of the volumetric 3D analysis for AA and AXBm, respectively.
    UNASSIGNED: This study suggests that the dose calculated to medium using AXBm algorithm is better than AAA and it could be used clinically. Switching the dose calculation algorithm from AA to AXB does not require extra measurements.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    患者质量保证(QA)是治疗护理路径的必要部分,计划失败会导致人员工作时间增加或延误治疗。美国医学物理学家协会的建议是使用伽马分析来评估测量的体积调制电弧治疗计划。供应商已经为患者QA设备开发了许多不同的测量几何形状,当使用推荐的公差时,可以产生不同的合格率。归一化,和标准。对于这项研究,临床治疗的立体定向身体放射治疗计划用于评估圆柱形体模上的集中式或外围测量几何结构的γ剂量容限和采样剂量分布复杂性的差异.然后将随机误差引入这些计划的子集,几何形状之间的通过率差异与观察到的数学差异相关。最后,将单一临床相关目标覆盖偏差引入另一个计划子集,以评估特定几何结构在识别临床相关错误方面是否具有可测量的更好效果.发现与外围几何形状相比,集中式几何形状导致更宽松的剂量公差和更不复杂的采样剂量分布。周边测量几何形状的合格率均匀较低,几何形状之间的通过率差异与剂量耐受性的差异密切相关,而与所选择的复杂性指标的差异密切相关。然而,当使用推荐的公差和标准时,两种几何形状都没有足够的灵敏度来检测目标覆盖范围的临床相关变化。他们的通过率之间没有统计学上的显着差异。鉴于这些发现,作者得出的结论是,立体定向身体放射治疗计划可能会使患者QA失败,但在周围几何中进行测量,但在集中几何中通过,可能与真正的临床偏差都没有相关性。
    Patient quality assurance (QA) is a required part of the treatment care path, and plan failure can lead to increased personnel hours or delay of treatment. The recommendation by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine is that gamma analysis be used to evaluate measured volumetric modulated arc therapy plans. Vendors have developed many different measurement geometries for patient QA devices which could yield varying pass rates when used with the recommended tolerances, normalization, and criterion. For this study, clinically treated stereotactic body radiation therapy plans were used to evaluate differences in gamma dose tolerances and sampled dose distribution complexity for centralized or peripheral measurement geometries on a cylindrical phantom. Random errors were then introduced into a subset of these plans, and the differences in pass rates between the geometries were correlated with differences in the observed mathematical differences. Finally, a single clinically relevant target coverage deviation was introduced to another subset of plans to evaluate whether a particular geometry is measurably better at identifying clinically relevant errors. It was found that centralized geometries resulted in more lenient dose tolerances and less complex sampled dose distributions compared to peripheral geometries. Pass rates were uniformly lower in the peripheral measurement geometry, and the difference in pass rates between the geometries correlated strongly with the difference in dose tolerance and weakly with the difference in the chosen complexity metrics. However, neither of the geometries were sufficiently sensitive enough to detect clinically relevant changes to target coverage when using recommended tolerances and criteria, and no statistically significant difference was found between their pass rates. Given these findings, the authors concluded that stereotactic body radiation therapy plans could fail patient QA when measured in the peripheral geometry but pass in the centralized geometry, with possibly neither having correlation to true clinical deviation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    这项研究的目的是开发一种新颖的质量保证(QA)程序,以检查图像引导的近距离放射治疗的整个治疗链,并使用凝胶剂量计在单个设置和照射中进行剂量分布评估。
    使用聚合物凝胶,并通过磁共振扫描进行读出。使用Oncentra计划系统(Elekta,瑞典),并且使用具有Ir-192源的后加载装置进行三次辐照。使用6-MVX射线创建凝胶的剂量反应曲线,它独立于源光束。使用测量的剂量作为参考,计算沿源传输轴的冠状平面上的平面伽马图像,和计算的剂量被用于几个误差模拟(无误差;2.0或2.5毫米的系统和随机源定位错误;和2%的剂量误差,5%,10%,和20%)。
    剂量-R2(自旋-自旋弛豫率)转换表显示,6-MVX射线的不确定性和剂量分辨率优于Ir-192,并且在三个测量之间也是恒定的。根据3%/1毫米标准,除2%和5%的剂量误差外,每对设置之间的差异均有统计学意义.
    这项工作描述了一种简单有效的端到端测试,可以为图像引导的近距离放射治疗的QA提供临床上有用的工具。在这个QA计划中,空气角膜强度和停留位置设置也可以验证。此测试还可以区分不同类型的错误。
    The purpose of this study was to develop a novel quality assurance (QA) program to check the entire treatment chain of image-guided brachytherapy with dose distribution evaluation in a single setup and irradiation using a gel dosimeter.
    A polymer gel was used, and the readout was performed by magnetic resonance scanning. A CT-based treatment plan was generated using the Oncentra planning system (Elekta, Sweden), and irradiation was performed three times using an afterloading device with an Ir-192 source. The dose-response curve of the gel was created using 6-MV X-ray, which is independent of the source beams. Planar gamma images on a coronal plane along the source transport axis were calculated using the measured dose as a reference, and the calculated doses were used in several error simulations (no error; 2.0 or 2.5 mm systematic and random source dwell mispositioning; and dose error of 2%, 5%, 10%, and 20%).
    The dose-R2 (spin-spin relaxation rate) conversion table revealed that the uncertainty and dose resolution of 6-MV X-ray were better than those of Ir-192 and also constant between the three measurements. With the 3%/1 mm criteria, there were statistically significant differences between each pair of settings except dose error of 2% and 5%.
    This work depicts a simple and efficient end-to-end test that can provide a clinically useful tool for QA of image-guided brachytherapy. In this QA program, air kerma strength and dwell position setting could also be verified. This test can also distinguish between different types of error.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

公众号