Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T21:24:44.320Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Commissioning experience of the X-ray volume imaging system of an image-guided radiotherapy capable linear accelerator

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 January 2020

Payal Raina Open the ORCID record for Payal Raina [Opens in a new window]  and
Susanta Kumar Sahoo
Payal Raina*
Affiliation:
Department of Radiotherapy, Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India
Susanta Kumar Sahoo
Affiliation:
Department of Radiotherapy, Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences, Ranchi, Jharkhand, India
*
Author for correspondence: Payal Raina, Department of Radiotherapy, Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences, E 2 Rashmi Enclave Arvind Marg, Bariatu, Bariyatu, Ranchi, Jharkhand834009, India. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aim:

An image-guided radiotherapy capable linear accelerator was installed at our hospital which is equipped with an X-ray volumetric imaging (XVI) system. The aim of this study was to describe the results of acceptance tests which were carried out on the XVI facility to verify the manufacturer’s specification.

Materials and methods:

The commissioning test had six elements: system safety, geometric accuracy, image quality, registration and correction accuracy, X-ray tube and generator performance, and quality assurance (QA) procedures.

Results:

We had satisfactory results for all the tests. The system passed the safety testes, and the agreement of isocentres was found to be within the tolerance limit. Imaging quality was acceptable. Registration and correction accuracy was tasted with indigenously developed phantom and positioned accurately at isocentre. X-ray tube and generator test results showed that the tube was performing properly.

Findings:

The described tests represent that the performance of the system is maintained at acceptable levels.

Keywords

contrast visibilityimage-guided radiotherapy and quality assurancespatial resolutionX-ray volumetric imaging system
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , March 2021 , pp. 108 - 113
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Van Herk, M. Different styles of image-guided radiotherapy. Semin Radiat Oncol 2007; 17: 258–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Verellen, D, De Ridder, M, Linthout, N, Tournel, K, Soete, G, Storme, G. Innovations and advances in radiation technology. Nat Rev Cancer 2007; 7: 949–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verellen, D, De Ridder, M, Storme, G. A (short) history of image-guided radiation therapy. Radiother Oncol 2008; 86: 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, T, Schreibmann, E, Yang, Y, Xing, L. Motion correction for improved target localization with on board cone-beam computed tomography. Phys Med Biol 2006; 51 (2): 253–267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Letourneau, D, Wong, JW, Oldham, M et al. Cone-beam-CT guided radiation therapy: technical implementation. Radiotherapy Oncol 2005; 75: 279–286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Almond, PR, Biggs, PJ, Coursey, BM et al. AAPM’s TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of highenergy photon and electron beams. Med Phys 1999; 26 (9): 1847–1870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nath, R, Biggs, PJ, Bova, FJ et al. AAPM code of practice for radiotherapy accelerators: report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Task Group No. 45. Med Phys 1994; 21 (7): 1093–1121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Letourneau, D, Wong, JW, Oldham, M et al. Cone-beam-CT guided radiation therapy: technical implementation. Radiother Oncol 2005; 75 (3): 279–286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oldham, M, Letourneau, D, Watt, L et al. Cone-beam-CT guided radiation therapy: a model for on-line application. Radiother Oncol 2005; 75 (3): 271–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Groh, BA, Siewerdsen, JH, Drake, DG, Wong, JW, Jaffray, DA. A performance comparison of flat-panel imger-based MV and KV cone-beam CT. Med Phys 2002; 29 (6): 967–975.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehmann, J, Perks, J, Semon, S, Harse, R, Purdy, JA. Initial experience with CBCT and IGRT. Int J Radiation Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 66: 620–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
AL-Jasim, AK, Hulugalle, SNCWMPSK, Al-Hamadani, HK. A Quality Control Test for General X-Ray Machine. WSN 2017; 90: 11–30.Google Scholar
Lehmann, J, Perks, J, Semon, S, Harse, R, Purdy, JA. Commissioning experience with cone-beam computed tomography for image-guided radiation therapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2007; 3 (8): 21–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB), SAFETY CODE NO.AERB/RF-MED/SC-3 (Rev. 2). Radiation safety in Manufacture, supply and use of medical diagnostic X-ray Equipment, 2016.Google Scholar