Long-term evaluation and cross-checking of two geometric calibrations of kV and MV imaging systems for Linacs

Tsuicheng D. Chiu, Yulong Yan, Ryan Foster, Weihua Mao

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Geometric or mechanical accuracy of kV and MV imaging systems of two Varian TrueBeam linacs have been monitored by two geomertirc calibration systems, Varian IsoCal geometric calibration system and home-developed gQA system. Results of both systems are cross-checked and the long-term geometric stabilities of linacs are evaluated. Two geometric calibration methodologies have been used to assess kV and MV imaging systems and their coincidence periodically on two TrueBeam linacs for about one year. Both systems analyze kV or MV projection images of special designed phantoms to retrieve geometric parameters of the imaging systems. The isocenters - laser isocenter and centers of rotations of kV imager and EPID - are then calculated, based on results of multiple projections from different angles. Long-term calibration results from both systems are compared for cross-checking. There are 24 sessions of side-by-side calibrations performed by both systems on two TrueBeam linacs. All the disagreements of isocenters between two calibrations systems are less than 1 mm with ± 0.1 mm SD. Most of the large disagreements occurred in vertical direction (AP direction), with an averaged disagreement of 0.45 mm. The average disagreements of isocenters are 0.09 mm in other directions. Additional to long-term calibration monitoring, for the accuracy test, special tests were performed by misaligning QA phantoms on purpose (5 mm away from setup isocenter in AP, SI, and lateral directions) to test the liability performance of both systems with the known deviations. The errors are within 0.5 mm. Both geometric calibration systems, IsoCal and gQA, are capable of detecting geometric deviations of kV and MV imaging systems of linacs. The long-term evaluation also shows that the deviations of geometric parameters and the geometric accuracies of both linacs are small and very consistent during the one-year study period.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)306-310
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics
Volume16
Issue number4
StatePublished - 2015

Fingerprint

Imaging systems
Calibration
geometric accuracy
evaluation
deviation
projection
liabilities
International System of Units
methodology
Systems Analysis
Image sensors
lasers
Lasers
Direction compound
Monitoring

Keywords

  • EPID
  • Geometric calibration
  • Image guidance
  • kV imaging
  • MV imaging
  • QA

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Radiation
  • Instrumentation

Cite this

Long-term evaluation and cross-checking of two geometric calibrations of kV and MV imaging systems for Linacs. / Chiu, Tsuicheng D.; Yan, Yulong; Foster, Ryan; Mao, Weihua.

In: Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, Vol. 16, No. 4, 2015, p. 306-310.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{4c811a75781a42e2ae946e81c0d5fad0,
title = "Long-term evaluation and cross-checking of two geometric calibrations of kV and MV imaging systems for Linacs",
abstract = "Geometric or mechanical accuracy of kV and MV imaging systems of two Varian TrueBeam linacs have been monitored by two geomertirc calibration systems, Varian IsoCal geometric calibration system and home-developed gQA system. Results of both systems are cross-checked and the long-term geometric stabilities of linacs are evaluated. Two geometric calibration methodologies have been used to assess kV and MV imaging systems and their coincidence periodically on two TrueBeam linacs for about one year. Both systems analyze kV or MV projection images of special designed phantoms to retrieve geometric parameters of the imaging systems. The isocenters - laser isocenter and centers of rotations of kV imager and EPID - are then calculated, based on results of multiple projections from different angles. Long-term calibration results from both systems are compared for cross-checking. There are 24 sessions of side-by-side calibrations performed by both systems on two TrueBeam linacs. All the disagreements of isocenters between two calibrations systems are less than 1 mm with ± 0.1 mm SD. Most of the large disagreements occurred in vertical direction (AP direction), with an averaged disagreement of 0.45 mm. The average disagreements of isocenters are 0.09 mm in other directions. Additional to long-term calibration monitoring, for the accuracy test, special tests were performed by misaligning QA phantoms on purpose (5 mm away from setup isocenter in AP, SI, and lateral directions) to test the liability performance of both systems with the known deviations. The errors are within 0.5 mm. Both geometric calibration systems, IsoCal and gQA, are capable of detecting geometric deviations of kV and MV imaging systems of linacs. The long-term evaluation also shows that the deviations of geometric parameters and the geometric accuracies of both linacs are small and very consistent during the one-year study period.",
keywords = "EPID, Geometric calibration, Image guidance, kV imaging, MV imaging, QA",
author = "Chiu, {Tsuicheng D.} and Yulong Yan and Ryan Foster and Weihua Mao",
year = "2015",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "16",
pages = "306--310",
journal = "Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics",
issn = "1526-9914",
publisher = "American Institute of Physics Publising LLC",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Long-term evaluation and cross-checking of two geometric calibrations of kV and MV imaging systems for Linacs

AU - Chiu, Tsuicheng D.

AU - Yan, Yulong

AU - Foster, Ryan

AU - Mao, Weihua

PY - 2015

Y1 - 2015

N2 - Geometric or mechanical accuracy of kV and MV imaging systems of two Varian TrueBeam linacs have been monitored by two geomertirc calibration systems, Varian IsoCal geometric calibration system and home-developed gQA system. Results of both systems are cross-checked and the long-term geometric stabilities of linacs are evaluated. Two geometric calibration methodologies have been used to assess kV and MV imaging systems and their coincidence periodically on two TrueBeam linacs for about one year. Both systems analyze kV or MV projection images of special designed phantoms to retrieve geometric parameters of the imaging systems. The isocenters - laser isocenter and centers of rotations of kV imager and EPID - are then calculated, based on results of multiple projections from different angles. Long-term calibration results from both systems are compared for cross-checking. There are 24 sessions of side-by-side calibrations performed by both systems on two TrueBeam linacs. All the disagreements of isocenters between two calibrations systems are less than 1 mm with ± 0.1 mm SD. Most of the large disagreements occurred in vertical direction (AP direction), with an averaged disagreement of 0.45 mm. The average disagreements of isocenters are 0.09 mm in other directions. Additional to long-term calibration monitoring, for the accuracy test, special tests were performed by misaligning QA phantoms on purpose (5 mm away from setup isocenter in AP, SI, and lateral directions) to test the liability performance of both systems with the known deviations. The errors are within 0.5 mm. Both geometric calibration systems, IsoCal and gQA, are capable of detecting geometric deviations of kV and MV imaging systems of linacs. The long-term evaluation also shows that the deviations of geometric parameters and the geometric accuracies of both linacs are small and very consistent during the one-year study period.

AB - Geometric or mechanical accuracy of kV and MV imaging systems of two Varian TrueBeam linacs have been monitored by two geomertirc calibration systems, Varian IsoCal geometric calibration system and home-developed gQA system. Results of both systems are cross-checked and the long-term geometric stabilities of linacs are evaluated. Two geometric calibration methodologies have been used to assess kV and MV imaging systems and their coincidence periodically on two TrueBeam linacs for about one year. Both systems analyze kV or MV projection images of special designed phantoms to retrieve geometric parameters of the imaging systems. The isocenters - laser isocenter and centers of rotations of kV imager and EPID - are then calculated, based on results of multiple projections from different angles. Long-term calibration results from both systems are compared for cross-checking. There are 24 sessions of side-by-side calibrations performed by both systems on two TrueBeam linacs. All the disagreements of isocenters between two calibrations systems are less than 1 mm with ± 0.1 mm SD. Most of the large disagreements occurred in vertical direction (AP direction), with an averaged disagreement of 0.45 mm. The average disagreements of isocenters are 0.09 mm in other directions. Additional to long-term calibration monitoring, for the accuracy test, special tests were performed by misaligning QA phantoms on purpose (5 mm away from setup isocenter in AP, SI, and lateral directions) to test the liability performance of both systems with the known deviations. The errors are within 0.5 mm. Both geometric calibration systems, IsoCal and gQA, are capable of detecting geometric deviations of kV and MV imaging systems of linacs. The long-term evaluation also shows that the deviations of geometric parameters and the geometric accuracies of both linacs are small and very consistent during the one-year study period.

KW - EPID

KW - Geometric calibration

KW - Image guidance

KW - kV imaging

KW - MV imaging

KW - QA

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84938916180&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84938916180&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 306

EP - 310

JO - Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics

JF - Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics

SN - 1526-9914

IS - 4

ER -