Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Commissioning and validation of fluence-based 3D VMAT dose reconstruction system using new transmission detector

  • Published:
Radiological Physics and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this study, we evaluated the basic performance of the three-dimensional dose verification system COMPASS (IBA Dosimetry). This system is capable of reconstructing 3D dose distributions on the patient anatomy based on the fluence measured using a new transmission detector (Dolphin, IBA Dosimetry) during treatment. The stability of the absolute dose and geometric calibrations of the COMPASS system with the Dolphin detector were investigated for fundamental validation. Furthermore, multileaf collimator (MLC) test patterns and a complicated volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan were used to evaluate the accuracy of the reconstructed dose distributions determined by the COMPASS. The results from the COMPASS were compared with those of a Monte Carlo simulation (MC), EDR2 film measurement, and a treatment planning system (TPS). The maximum errors for the absolute dose and geometrical position were − 0.28% and 1.0 mm for 3 months, respectively. The Dolphin detector, which consists of ionization chamber detectors, was firmly mounted on the linear accelerator and was very stable. For the MLC test patterns, the TPS showed a > 5% difference at small fields, while the COMPASS showed good agreement with the MC simulation at small fields. However, the COMPASS produced a large error for complex small fields. For a clinical VMAT plan, COMPASS was more accurate than TPS. COMPASS showed real delivered-dose distributions because it uses the measured fluence, a high-resolution detector, and accurate beam modeling. We confirm here that the accuracy and detectability of the delivered dose of the COMPASS system are sufficient for clinical practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ezzell GA, Galvin JM, Low D, et al. Guidance document on delivery, treatment planning, and clinical implementation of IMRT: report of the IMRT Subcommittee of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee. Med Phys. 2003;30:2089–115.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Carrasco P, Jornet N, Latorre A, et al. 3D DVH-based metric analysis versus per-beam planar analysis in IMRT pretreatment verification. Med Phys. 2012;39:5040–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Nelms BE, Opp D, Robinson J, et al. VMAT QA: measurement-guided 4D dose reconstruction on a patient. Med Phys. 2012;39:4228–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Boggula R, Lorenz F, Mueller L, et al. Experimental validation of a commercial 3D dose verification system for intensity-modulated arc therapies. Phys Med Biol. 2010;55:5619–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Boggula R, Jahnke L, Wertz H, et al. Patient-specific 3D pretreatment and potential 3D online dose verification of Monte Carlo-calculated IMRT prostate treatment plans. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2011;81:1168–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Korevaar EW, Wauben DJ, van der Hulst PC, et al. Clinical introduction of a linac head-mounted 2D detector array based quality assurance system in head and neck IMRT. Radiother Oncol. 2011;100:446–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Thoelking J, Sekar Y, Fleckenstein J, et al. Characterization of a new transmission detector for patient individualized online plan verification and its influence on 6MV x-ray beam characteristics. Z Med Phys. 2016;26:200–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Niroomand-Rad A, Blackwell CR, Coursey BM, et al. Radiochromic film dosimetry: recommendations of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 55. Med Phys. 1998;25:2093–115.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Rogers DWO, Faddegon BA, Ding GX, et al. BEAM: a Monte Carlo code to simulate radiotherapy treatment units. Med Phys. 1995;22:503–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Rogers DWO, Walters B, Kawrakow I (2011) BEAMnrcusers manual. NRCC Report PIRS-0509(A). Ottawa, ON: NRCC

  11. Walters B, Kawrakow I, Rogers DWO (2011) DOSXYZnrcusers manual. NRCC Report PIRS-794revB. Ottawa, ON: NRCC

  12. Létourneau D, Gulam M, Yan D, et al. Evaluation of a 2D diode array for IMRT quality assurance. Radiother Oncol. 2004;70:199–206.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Klein EE, Hanley J, Bayouth J, et al. Task Group 142 report: quality assurance of medical accelerators: report of the IMRT Subcommittee of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee. Med Phys. 2009;36:4197–212.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Chow JCL, Leung MKK, Dyk JV. Variations of lung density and geometry on inhomogeneity correction algorithms: a Monte Carlo dosimetric evaluation. Med Phys. 2009;36:3619–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Godart J, Korevaar EW, Visser R, et al. Reconstruction of high-resolution 3D dose from matrix measurements: error detection capability of the COMPASS correction kernel method. Phys Med Biol. 2011;56:5029–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Nakaguchi Y, Ono T, Maruyama T, et al. Validation of a method for in vivo 3D dose reconstruction in SBRT using a new transmission detector. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2017;18:69–75.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Lin Xu (IBA Dosimetry, Beijing, China), Karina Kuan-ChuanYeh (IBA Dosimetry, Taipei, Taiwan), Steven Hua-Han Ko (IBA Dosimetry, Taipei, Taiwan), Shunji Saiga (Toyo-medic, Fukuoka, Japan), and Yasuo Takanashi (Toyo-medic, Tokyo, Japan) for their help and discussions during this work. This manuscript was partly supported by Akiyoshi Ohtsuka Fellowship of the Japanese Society of Radiological Technology for improvement in English expression of a draft version of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiological Technology, Kumamoto University Hospital, 1-1-1 Honjyo, Kumamoto, Japan

    Yuji Nakaguchi, Masato Maruyama, Yoshinobu Shimohigashi, Yudai Kai & Yuya Nakamura

  2. Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, 4-24-1 Kuhonji, Kumamoto, Japan

    Takeshi Oono

Authors
  1. Yuji Nakaguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Takeshi Oono
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Masato Maruyama
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yoshinobu Shimohigashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yudai Kai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yuya Nakamura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuji Nakaguchi.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants and animals.

Informed consent

Therefore, we did not require any informed consent.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nakaguchi, Y., Oono, T., Maruyama, M. et al. Commissioning and validation of fluence-based 3D VMAT dose reconstruction system using new transmission detector. Radiol Phys Technol 11, 165–173 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-018-0451-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12194-018-0451-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation