Quality Control of Portal Imaging with PTW EPID QC PHANTOM

Performance of a linear accelerator couch positioning quality control task using an electronic portal imaging device

Short and semi-automated quality assurance (QA) programs are becoming one of the most popular and highly demanding tasks in radiotherapy. The current research investigates the accuracy of a four degrees of freedom (4DoF) medical linear accelerator couch positioning with a fast and accurate method based on images acquired using an electronic portal imaging device (EPID). An accurate EPID QA phantom and a proper in-house code were used. A Siemens medical linear accelerator equipped with an a-Si EPID was used to acquire portal images. For verifying the mechanical performance of the EPID positioning, EPID sensitivity, and accuracy of the code response from the image processing point of view were investigated. To characterize the results, three deviations in the phantom positioning were deliberately created. The translational and rotational displacements of the treatment couch were then evaluated. The loading effect on the treatment couch was then investigated. The results of prerequisite tests, including the mechanical performance of the EPID, and the sensitivity and accuracy of the recognition codes, were assessed. The results were found to be within the tolerance range reported at AAPM TG-142. The mean deviations of the tests between expected and measured displacements by 4DoF treatment couch were found to be 0.13° ± 0.11°, 0.12 ± 0.17 mm, 0.17 ± 0.13 mm, and 0.04 ± 0.09 mm for rotational, longitudinal, lateral, and vertical shifts, respectively. The results showed that the proposed method is a reliable and fast approach to find the uncertainties occurring intreatment couch positioning.

A quality assurance phantom for electronic portal imaging devices

Electronic portal imaging device (EPID) plays an important role in radiation therapy portal imaging, geometric and dosimetric verification. Consistent image quality and stable radiation response is necessary for proper utilization that requires routine quality assurance (QA). A commercial ‘EPID QC’ phantom weighing 3.8 kg with a dimension of 25×25×4.8 cm3 is used for EPID QA. This device has five essential tools to measure the geometric accuracy, signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR), dose linearity, and the low‐ and the high‐contrast resolutions. It is aligned with beam divergence to measure the imaging and geometric parameters in both X and Y directions, and can be used as a baseline check for routine QA. The low‐contrast tool consists of a series of holes with various diameters and depths in an aluminum slab, very similar to the Las Vegas phantom. The high‐resolution contrast tool provides the modulation transfer function (MTF) in both the x‐ and y‐dimensions to measure the focal spot of linear accelerator that is important for imaging and small field dosimetry. The device is tested in different institutions with various amorphous silicon imagers including Elekta, Siemens and Varian units. Images of the QA phantom were acquired at 95.2 cm source‐skin‐distance (SSD) in the range 1–15 MU for a 26×26 cm2 field and phantom surface is set normal to the beam direction when gantry is at 0° and 90°. The epidSoft is a software program provided with the EPID QA phantom for analysis of the data. The preliminary results using the phantom on the tested EPID showed very good low‐contrast resolution and high resolution, and an MTF (0.5) in the range of 0.3–0.4 lp/mm. All imagers also exhibit satisfactory geometric accuracy, dose linearity and SNR, and are independent of MU and spatial orientations. The epidSoft maintains an image analysis record and provides a graph of the temporal variations in imaging parameters. In conclusion, this device is simple to use and provides testing on basic and advanced imaging parameters for daily QA on any imager used in clinical practices.

PACS number: 87.57 C‐, 87.57 N‐

Verification of quality parameters for portal images in radiotherapy

Background

The purpose of the study was to verify different values of quality parameters of portal images in radiotherapy.

Materials and methods

We investigated image qualities of different field verification systems. Four EPIDs (Siemens OptiVue500aSi^®, Siemens BeamView Plus^®, Elekta iView^® and Varian PortalVision™) were investigated with the PTW EPID QC PHANTOM^® and compared with two portal film systems (Kodak X-OMAT^® cassette with Kodak X-OMAT V^® film and Kodak EC-L Lightweight^® cassette with Kodak Portal Localisation ReadyPack^® film).

Results

A comparison of the f50 and f25 values of the modulation transfer functions (MTFs) belonging to each of the systems revealed that the amorphous silicon EPIDs provided a slightly better high contrast resolution than the Kodak Portal Localisation ReadyPack^® film with the EC-L Lightweight^® cassette. The Kodak X-OMAT V^® film gave a poor low contrast resolution: from the existing 27 holes only 9 were detectable.

Conclusions

On the base of physical characteristics, measured in this work, the authors suggest the use of amorphous-silicon EPIDs producing the best image quality. Parameters of the EPIDs with scanning liquid ionisation chamber (SLIC) were very stable. The disadvantage of older versions of EPIDs like SLIC and VEPID is a poor DICOM implementation, and the modulation transfer function (MTF) values (f50 and f25) are less than that of aSi detectors.