TH‐C‐T‐6E‐09

Multi‐Leaf‐Collimator Quality Assurance Using the Electronic Portal Imaging Device

I. Ali, S. Benedict, w. li, F. Lerma, Nesrin Dogan, J. Siebers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To test the amorphous silicon (aSi) electronic portal imaging device (EPID) for quality assurance (QA) of the multi‐leaf collimators (MLC) and to validate its use as a dynamic intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) QA device. Method and Materials: Established MLC QA for IMRT utilizes dosimetric outputs from a single point in phantom with a chamber, and radiographic film to capture the density‐pattern of the MLC. We propose using the aSi EPID 2D‐density distribution to replace the chamber/film for MLC QA, and to verify the dosimetry and mechanics of the MLC for IMRT. A protocol was developed to acquire QA data from the aSi EPID to provide tests for high dose gradients, average output doses, mechanical leaf stability, speed and positioning. The effects of various EPID exposed areas (2×2, 4×4, 6×6 cm2) were used for intercomparison measurements with ion chamber and film. Results: Radiographic film output at gantry angle 270° relative to 0° varies by less than 2%, while the film measurements at other gantry/collimator angles agree within 1% with the ionization chamber. For the same conditions, EPID outputs vary by 1%–5% depending upon exposed area. Output variations may be due to mechanical shifts, gantry and EPID sag, or MLC drifts due to gravity. Minimizing these effects is under further investigation. Conclusion: A method has been developed to utilize the aSi EPID for MLC QA. The 2D density distributions of the EPID offer the potential for more quantitative analysis, and this procedure can be integrated into a routine program for comprehensive dynamic MLC‐based IMRT and EPID QA. Conflict of Interest: This work supported in‐part by Varian Medical Systems.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2168-2169
Number of pages2
JournalMedical Physics
Volume32
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Equipment and Supplies
Silicon
Radiotherapy
X-Ray Film
Conflict of Interest
Gravitation
Mechanics
Ions

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

TH‐C‐T‐6E‐09 : Multi‐Leaf‐Collimator Quality Assurance Using the Electronic Portal Imaging Device. / Ali, I.; Benedict, S.; li, w.; Lerma, F.; Dogan, Nesrin; Siebers, J.

In: Medical Physics, Vol. 32, No. 6, 2005, p. 2168-2169.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Ali, I. ; Benedict, S. ; li, w. ; Lerma, F. ; Dogan, Nesrin ; Siebers, J. / TH‐C‐T‐6E‐09 : Multi‐Leaf‐Collimator Quality Assurance Using the Electronic Portal Imaging Device. In: Medical Physics. 2005 ; Vol. 32, No. 6. pp. 2168-2169.
@article{60271a020ba4419b9e9dc3e2c8ea964e,
title = "TH‐C‐T‐6E‐09: Multi‐Leaf‐Collimator Quality Assurance Using the Electronic Portal Imaging Device",
abstract = "Purpose: To test the amorphous silicon (aSi) electronic portal imaging device (EPID) for quality assurance (QA) of the multi‐leaf collimators (MLC) and to validate its use as a dynamic intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) QA device. Method and Materials: Established MLC QA for IMRT utilizes dosimetric outputs from a single point in phantom with a chamber, and radiographic film to capture the density‐pattern of the MLC. We propose using the aSi EPID 2D‐density distribution to replace the chamber/film for MLC QA, and to verify the dosimetry and mechanics of the MLC for IMRT. A protocol was developed to acquire QA data from the aSi EPID to provide tests for high dose gradients, average output doses, mechanical leaf stability, speed and positioning. The effects of various EPID exposed areas (2×2, 4×4, 6×6 cm2) were used for intercomparison measurements with ion chamber and film. Results: Radiographic film output at gantry angle 270° relative to 0° varies by less than 2{\%}, while the film measurements at other gantry/collimator angles agree within 1{\%} with the ionization chamber. For the same conditions, EPID outputs vary by 1{\%}–5{\%} depending upon exposed area. Output variations may be due to mechanical shifts, gantry and EPID sag, or MLC drifts due to gravity. Minimizing these effects is under further investigation. Conclusion: A method has been developed to utilize the aSi EPID for MLC QA. The 2D density distributions of the EPID offer the potential for more quantitative analysis, and this procedure can be integrated into a routine program for comprehensive dynamic MLC‐based IMRT and EPID QA. Conflict of Interest: This work supported in‐part by Varian Medical Systems.",
author = "I. Ali and S. Benedict and w. li and F. Lerma and Nesrin Dogan and J. Siebers",
year = "2005",
doi = "10.1118/1.1998685",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "32",
pages = "2168--2169",
journal = "Medical Physics",
issn = "0094-2405",
publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - TH‐C‐T‐6E‐09

T2 - Multi‐Leaf‐Collimator Quality Assurance Using the Electronic Portal Imaging Device

AU - Ali, I.

AU - Benedict, S.

AU - li, w.

AU - Lerma, F.

AU - Dogan, Nesrin

AU - Siebers, J.

PY - 2005

Y1 - 2005

N2 - Purpose: To test the amorphous silicon (aSi) electronic portal imaging device (EPID) for quality assurance (QA) of the multi‐leaf collimators (MLC) and to validate its use as a dynamic intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) QA device. Method and Materials: Established MLC QA for IMRT utilizes dosimetric outputs from a single point in phantom with a chamber, and radiographic film to capture the density‐pattern of the MLC. We propose using the aSi EPID 2D‐density distribution to replace the chamber/film for MLC QA, and to verify the dosimetry and mechanics of the MLC for IMRT. A protocol was developed to acquire QA data from the aSi EPID to provide tests for high dose gradients, average output doses, mechanical leaf stability, speed and positioning. The effects of various EPID exposed areas (2×2, 4×4, 6×6 cm2) were used for intercomparison measurements with ion chamber and film. Results: Radiographic film output at gantry angle 270° relative to 0° varies by less than 2%, while the film measurements at other gantry/collimator angles agree within 1% with the ionization chamber. For the same conditions, EPID outputs vary by 1%–5% depending upon exposed area. Output variations may be due to mechanical shifts, gantry and EPID sag, or MLC drifts due to gravity. Minimizing these effects is under further investigation. Conclusion: A method has been developed to utilize the aSi EPID for MLC QA. The 2D density distributions of the EPID offer the potential for more quantitative analysis, and this procedure can be integrated into a routine program for comprehensive dynamic MLC‐based IMRT and EPID QA. Conflict of Interest: This work supported in‐part by Varian Medical Systems.

AB - Purpose: To test the amorphous silicon (aSi) electronic portal imaging device (EPID) for quality assurance (QA) of the multi‐leaf collimators (MLC) and to validate its use as a dynamic intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) QA device. Method and Materials: Established MLC QA for IMRT utilizes dosimetric outputs from a single point in phantom with a chamber, and radiographic film to capture the density‐pattern of the MLC. We propose using the aSi EPID 2D‐density distribution to replace the chamber/film for MLC QA, and to verify the dosimetry and mechanics of the MLC for IMRT. A protocol was developed to acquire QA data from the aSi EPID to provide tests for high dose gradients, average output doses, mechanical leaf stability, speed and positioning. The effects of various EPID exposed areas (2×2, 4×4, 6×6 cm2) were used for intercomparison measurements with ion chamber and film. Results: Radiographic film output at gantry angle 270° relative to 0° varies by less than 2%, while the film measurements at other gantry/collimator angles agree within 1% with the ionization chamber. For the same conditions, EPID outputs vary by 1%–5% depending upon exposed area. Output variations may be due to mechanical shifts, gantry and EPID sag, or MLC drifts due to gravity. Minimizing these effects is under further investigation. Conclusion: A method has been developed to utilize the aSi EPID for MLC QA. The 2D density distributions of the EPID offer the potential for more quantitative analysis, and this procedure can be integrated into a routine program for comprehensive dynamic MLC‐based IMRT and EPID QA. Conflict of Interest: This work supported in‐part by Varian Medical Systems.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85024804087&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85024804087&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.1998685

DO - 10.1118/1.1998685

M3 - Article

VL - 32

SP - 2168

EP - 2169

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 6

ER -