IMRT delivery verification using a spiral phantom

Susan L. Richardson, Wolfgang A. Tome, Nigel P. Orton, Todd R. McNutt, Bhudatt R. Paliwal

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

25 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this paper we report on the testing and verification of a system for IMRT delivery quality assurance that uses a cylindrical solid water phantom with a spiral trajectory for radiographic film placement. This spiral film technique provides more complete dosimetric verification of the entire IMRT treatment than perpendicular film methods, since it samples a three-dimensional dose subspace rather than using measurements at only one or two depths. As an example, the complete analysis of the predicted and measured spiral films is described for an intracranial IMRT treatment case. The results of this analysis are compared to those of a single field perpendicular film technique that is typically used for IMRT QA. The comparison demonstrates that both methods result in a dosimetric error within a clinical tolerance of 5%, however the spiral phantom QA technique provides a more complete dosimetric verification while being less time consuming. To independently verify the dosimetry obtained with the spiral film, the same IMRT treatment was delivered to a similar phantom in which LiF thermoluminescent dosimeters were arranged along the spiral trajectory. The maximum difference between the predicted and measured TLD data for the 1.8 Gy fraction was 0.06 Gy for a TLD located in a high dose gradient region. This further validates the ability of the spiral phantom QA process to accurately verify delivery of an IMRT plan.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2553-2558
Number of pages6
JournalMedical Physics
Volume30
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2003
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

X-Ray Film
Water
Radiation Dosimeters

Keywords

  • IMRT
  • QA phantoms
  • Quality assurence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics

Cite this

Richardson, S. L., Tome, W. A., Orton, N. P., McNutt, T. R., & Paliwal, B. R. (2003). IMRT delivery verification using a spiral phantom. Medical Physics, 30(9), 2553-2558. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1603965

IMRT delivery verification using a spiral phantom. / Richardson, Susan L.; Tome, Wolfgang A.; Orton, Nigel P.; McNutt, Todd R.; Paliwal, Bhudatt R.

In: Medical Physics, Vol. 30, No. 9, 01.09.2003, p. 2553-2558.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Richardson, SL, Tome, WA, Orton, NP, McNutt, TR & Paliwal, BR 2003, 'IMRT delivery verification using a spiral phantom', Medical Physics, vol. 30, no. 9, pp. 2553-2558. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1603965
Richardson SL, Tome WA, Orton NP, McNutt TR, Paliwal BR. IMRT delivery verification using a spiral phantom. Medical Physics. 2003 Sep 1;30(9):2553-2558. https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1603965
Richardson, Susan L. ; Tome, Wolfgang A. ; Orton, Nigel P. ; McNutt, Todd R. ; Paliwal, Bhudatt R. / IMRT delivery verification using a spiral phantom. In: Medical Physics. 2003 ; Vol. 30, No. 9. pp. 2553-2558.
@article{c201c04a7c2a4536898cdc3676a5a7b6,
title = "IMRT delivery verification using a spiral phantom",
abstract = "In this paper we report on the testing and verification of a system for IMRT delivery quality assurance that uses a cylindrical solid water phantom with a spiral trajectory for radiographic film placement. This spiral film technique provides more complete dosimetric verification of the entire IMRT treatment than perpendicular film methods, since it samples a three-dimensional dose subspace rather than using measurements at only one or two depths. As an example, the complete analysis of the predicted and measured spiral films is described for an intracranial IMRT treatment case. The results of this analysis are compared to those of a single field perpendicular film technique that is typically used for IMRT QA. The comparison demonstrates that both methods result in a dosimetric error within a clinical tolerance of 5{\%}, however the spiral phantom QA technique provides a more complete dosimetric verification while being less time consuming. To independently verify the dosimetry obtained with the spiral film, the same IMRT treatment was delivered to a similar phantom in which LiF thermoluminescent dosimeters were arranged along the spiral trajectory. The maximum difference between the predicted and measured TLD data for the 1.8 Gy fraction was 0.06 Gy for a TLD located in a high dose gradient region. This further validates the ability of the spiral phantom QA process to accurately verify delivery of an IMRT plan.",
keywords = "IMRT, QA phantoms, Quality assurence",
author = "Richardson, {Susan L.} and Tome, {Wolfgang A.} and Orton, {Nigel P.} and McNutt, {Todd R.} and Paliwal, {Bhudatt R.}",
year = "2003",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1118/1.1603965",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "2553--2558",
journal = "Medical Physics",
issn = "0094-2405",
publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - IMRT delivery verification using a spiral phantom

AU - Richardson, Susan L.

AU - Tome, Wolfgang A.

AU - Orton, Nigel P.

AU - McNutt, Todd R.

AU - Paliwal, Bhudatt R.

PY - 2003/9/1

Y1 - 2003/9/1

N2 - In this paper we report on the testing and verification of a system for IMRT delivery quality assurance that uses a cylindrical solid water phantom with a spiral trajectory for radiographic film placement. This spiral film technique provides more complete dosimetric verification of the entire IMRT treatment than perpendicular film methods, since it samples a three-dimensional dose subspace rather than using measurements at only one or two depths. As an example, the complete analysis of the predicted and measured spiral films is described for an intracranial IMRT treatment case. The results of this analysis are compared to those of a single field perpendicular film technique that is typically used for IMRT QA. The comparison demonstrates that both methods result in a dosimetric error within a clinical tolerance of 5%, however the spiral phantom QA technique provides a more complete dosimetric verification while being less time consuming. To independently verify the dosimetry obtained with the spiral film, the same IMRT treatment was delivered to a similar phantom in which LiF thermoluminescent dosimeters were arranged along the spiral trajectory. The maximum difference between the predicted and measured TLD data for the 1.8 Gy fraction was 0.06 Gy for a TLD located in a high dose gradient region. This further validates the ability of the spiral phantom QA process to accurately verify delivery of an IMRT plan.

AB - In this paper we report on the testing and verification of a system for IMRT delivery quality assurance that uses a cylindrical solid water phantom with a spiral trajectory for radiographic film placement. This spiral film technique provides more complete dosimetric verification of the entire IMRT treatment than perpendicular film methods, since it samples a three-dimensional dose subspace rather than using measurements at only one or two depths. As an example, the complete analysis of the predicted and measured spiral films is described for an intracranial IMRT treatment case. The results of this analysis are compared to those of a single field perpendicular film technique that is typically used for IMRT QA. The comparison demonstrates that both methods result in a dosimetric error within a clinical tolerance of 5%, however the spiral phantom QA technique provides a more complete dosimetric verification while being less time consuming. To independently verify the dosimetry obtained with the spiral film, the same IMRT treatment was delivered to a similar phantom in which LiF thermoluminescent dosimeters were arranged along the spiral trajectory. The maximum difference between the predicted and measured TLD data for the 1.8 Gy fraction was 0.06 Gy for a TLD located in a high dose gradient region. This further validates the ability of the spiral phantom QA process to accurately verify delivery of an IMRT plan.

KW - IMRT

KW - QA phantoms

KW - Quality assurence

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0141631836&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0141631836&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.1603965

DO - 10.1118/1.1603965

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - 2553

EP - 2558

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 9

ER -