+ Site Statistics
References:
52,654,530
Abstracts:
29,560,856
PMIDs:
28,072,755
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn

+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Application of a 3D volumetric display for radiation therapy treatment planning I: quality assurance procedures



Application of a 3D volumetric display for radiation therapy treatment planning I: quality assurance procedures



Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 10(3): 2900



To design and implement a set of quality assurance tests for an innovative 3D volumetric display for radiation treatment planning applications. A genuine 3D display (Perspecta Spatial 3D, Actuality-Systems Inc., Bedford, MA) has been integrated with the Pinnacle TPS (Philips Medical Systems, Madison WI), for treatment planning. The Perspecta 3D display renders a 25 cm diameter volume that is viewable from any side, floating within a translucent dome. In addition to displaying all 3D data exported from Pinnacle, the system provides a 3D mouse to define beam angles and apertures and to measure distance. The focus of this work is the design and implementation of a quality assurance program for 3D displays and specific 3D planning issues as guided by AAPM Task Group Report 53. A series of acceptance and quality assurance tests have been designed to evaluate the accuracy of CT images, contours, beams, and dose distributions as displayed on Perspecta. Three-dimensional matrices, rulers and phantoms with known spatial dimensions were used to check Perspecta's absolute spatial accuracy. In addition, a system of tests was designed to confirm Perspecta's ability to import and display Pinnacle data consistently. CT scans of phantoms were used to confirm beam field size, divergence, and gantry and couch angular accuracy as displayed on Perspecta. Beam angles were verified through Cartesian coordinate system measurements and by CT scans of phantoms rotated at known angles. Beams designed on Perspecta were exported to Pinnacle and checked for accuracy. Dose at sampled points were checked for consistency with Pinnacle and agreed within 1% or 1 mm. All data exported from Pinnacle to Perspecta was displayed consistently. The 3D spatial display of images, contours, and dose distributions were consistent with Pinnacle display. When measured by the 3D ruler, the distances between any two points calculated using Perspecta agreed with Pinnacle within the measurement error.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 051607070

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 19692974

DOI: 10.1120/jacmp.v10i3.2900



Related references

Quality assurance in radiation therapy: clinical and physical aspects. Quality assurance in dosimetry and treatment planning. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics 10 Suppl 1: 105-109, 1984

A global quality assurance system for personalized radiation therapy treatment planning for the prostate (or other sites). Physics in Medicine and Biology 59(18): 5575-5591, 2015

Volumetric-modulated Arc Therapy Lung Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Dosimetric Quality Assurance: A Comparison between Radiochromic Film and Chamber Array. Journal of Medical Physics 42(3): 133-139, 2017

A knowledge-based approach to improving and homogenizing intensity modulated radiation therapy planning quality among treatment centers: an example application to prostate cancer planning. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics 87(1): 176-181, 2013

Quality assurance procedures for stereotactic body radiation therapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics 71(1 Suppl): S122-S125, 2008

Quality assurance in planning and implementing radiation therapy. Rays 21(4): 573-577, 1996

Comparison of action levels for patient-specific quality assurance of intensity modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy treatments. Medical Physics 39(7): 4378-4385, 2012

Quality assurance and quality control for radiation treatment planning systems. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi 60(5): 607-616, 2004

A fully electronic intensity-modulated radiation therapy quality assurance (IMRT QA) process implemented in a network comprised of independent treatment planning, record and verify, and delivery systems. Radiology and Oncology 44(2): 124-130, 2010

Three-dimensional display in planning radiation therapy: a clinical perspective. Photon Treatment Planning Collaborative Working Group. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics 21(1): 79-89, 1991

A quality assurance phantom for three-dimensional radiation treatment planning. International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics 44(4): 955-966, July 1, 1999

Quality assurance procedures during commissioning of a treatment planning system as a tool to establish new standards before migration. Journal of Contemporary BrachyTherapy 2(2): 76-80, 2010

The first implementation of IMRT technique for head & neck and prostate cancer patients in public sector in Greece: feasibility, treatment planning and dose delivery verification using the delta(4PT) Pre-Treatment volumetric quality assurance system. Journal of B.U.On. 20(1): 196-205, 2015

Quality assurance of radiation therapy planning systems: current status and remaining challenges. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics 71(1 Suppl): S23-S27, 2008

Re: Multicentre quality assurance of intensity-modulated radiation therapy planning: beware the benchmarker. Journal of Medical Imaging and Radiation Oncology 52(3): 303-303, 2008