We have located links that may give you full text access.
How the detector resolution affects the clinical significance of SBRT pre-treatment quality assurance results.
Physica Medica : PM 2018 May
PURPOSE: Aim of this work was to study how the detector resolution can affect the clinical significance of SBRT pre-treatment volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) verification results.
METHODS: Three detectors (PTW OCTAVIUS 4D 729, 1500 and 100 SRS) used in five configurations with different resolution were compared: 729, 729 merged, 1500, 1500 merged and 1000 SRS. Absolute local gamma passing rates of 3D pre-treatment quality assurance (QA) were evaluated for 150 dose distributions in 30 plans. Five different kinds of error were introduced in order to establish the detection sensitivity of the three devices. Percentage dosimetric differences were evaluated between planned dosevolume histogram (DVH) and patients' predicted DVH calculated by PTW DVH 4D® software.
RESULTS: The mean gamma passing rates and the standard deviations were 92.4% ± 3.7%, 94.6% ± 1.8%, 95.3% ± 4.2%, 97.4% ± 2.5% and 97.6% ± 1.4 respectively for 729, 729 merged, 1500, 1500 merged and 1000 SRS with 2% local dose/2mm criterion. The same trend was found on the sensitivity analysis: using a tight gamma analysis criterion (2%L/1mm) only the 1000 SRS detected every kind of error, while 729 and 1500 merged detected three and four kinds of error respectively. Regarding dose metrics extracted from DVH curves, D50% was within the tolerance level in more than 90% of cases only for the 1000 SRS.
CONCLUSIONS: The detector resolution can significantly affect the clinical significance of SBRT pre-treatment verification results. The choice of a detector with resolution suitable to the investigated field size is of main importance to avoid getting false positive.
METHODS: Three detectors (PTW OCTAVIUS 4D 729, 1500 and 100 SRS) used in five configurations with different resolution were compared: 729, 729 merged, 1500, 1500 merged and 1000 SRS. Absolute local gamma passing rates of 3D pre-treatment quality assurance (QA) were evaluated for 150 dose distributions in 30 plans. Five different kinds of error were introduced in order to establish the detection sensitivity of the three devices. Percentage dosimetric differences were evaluated between planned dosevolume histogram (DVH) and patients' predicted DVH calculated by PTW DVH 4D® software.
RESULTS: The mean gamma passing rates and the standard deviations were 92.4% ± 3.7%, 94.6% ± 1.8%, 95.3% ± 4.2%, 97.4% ± 2.5% and 97.6% ± 1.4 respectively for 729, 729 merged, 1500, 1500 merged and 1000 SRS with 2% local dose/2mm criterion. The same trend was found on the sensitivity analysis: using a tight gamma analysis criterion (2%L/1mm) only the 1000 SRS detected every kind of error, while 729 and 1500 merged detected three and four kinds of error respectively. Regarding dose metrics extracted from DVH curves, D50% was within the tolerance level in more than 90% of cases only for the 1000 SRS.
CONCLUSIONS: The detector resolution can significantly affect the clinical significance of SBRT pre-treatment verification results. The choice of a detector with resolution suitable to the investigated field size is of main importance to avoid getting false positive.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app