Cui Fengwei, Jin Tao, Li Mingzhu, Zhu Lei, Di Xing, Zhu Huaguang
CyberKnife Center, Department of Neurosurgery, Huashan Hospital, Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
Neurosurgical Institute of Fudan University, Shanghai, China.
J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2024 Dec;25(12):e14508. doi: 10.1002/acm2.14508. Epub 2024 Sep 6.
The goal of this study is to assess the utility of Cherenkov imaging (CI) and scintillation imaging (SI) as high-resolution techniques to measure CyberKnife® beam shape quantitatively at the irradiation surface in quality assurance (QA).
The EMCCD camera captured scintillation and Cherenkov photons arising from 6 MV x-ray dose deposition produced by the CyberKnife® VSI System. Two imaging methods were done at source to surface distance of 800 cm with the same field size, ranging from 10 to 60 mm using fixed cones and iris collimators. The output sensitivity and constancy were measured using the SI and CI, and benchmarked against an ionization chamber. Line profiles of each beam measured by optical imaging were compared with film measurement. Position shifts were introduced to test the sensitivity of SI and CI to small beam position deviations. To assess reproducibility, the beam measurements were tested three times on 5 consecutive days.
Both systems exhibited comparable sensitivity to the ionization chamber in response to fluctuations in CyberKnife® output. The beam profiles in SI matched well with the measured film image, with accuracy in the range of ± 0.20 and ± 0.26 mm standard deviation for the circle and iris field, respectively. The corresponding accuracy measured by CI is in the range of ± 0.25 and ± 0.33 mm, respectively. These are all within the tolerance recommended by the guidelines of CyberKnife® QA. The accuracy measured by SI and CI for 1 mm beam position shift within 0.21 and 0.45 mm tolerance, respectively. Repeatability measurements of the beam have shown a standard deviation within 0.94 mm.
SI and CI techniques are tested to provide a valid way to measure CyberKnife® beam shape in this study. Meanwhile, the systematic comparison of SI and CI also provides evidence for the measurement methods selection appropriately.
本研究的目的是评估切伦科夫成像(CI)和闪烁成像(SI)作为高分辨率技术在质量保证(QA)中定量测量射波刀®在照射表面的射束形状的效用。
EMCCD相机捕捉由射波刀®VSI系统产生的6MV X射线剂量沉积所产生的闪烁光子和切伦科夫光子。在源皮距为800cm、相同射野尺寸(使用固定准直器和虹膜准直器,范围为10至60mm)的条件下进行两种成像方法。使用SI和CI测量输出灵敏度和稳定性,并与电离室进行基准比较。将通过光学成像测量的每条射束的线轮廓与胶片测量结果进行比较。引入位置偏移以测试SI和CI对小射束位置偏差的灵敏度。为评估可重复性,在连续5天内对射束测量进行3次测试。
在响应射波刀®输出的波动方面,两个系统对电离室均表现出可比的灵敏度。SI中的射束轮廓与测量的胶片图像匹配良好,对于圆形和虹膜射野,标准差精度分别在±0.20和±0.26mm范围内。CI测量的相应精度分别在±0.25和±0.33mm范围内。这些均在射波刀®QA指南推荐的公差范围内。SI和CI测量的1mm射束位置偏移精度分别在0.21和0.45mm公差范围内。射束的重复性测量显示标准差在0.94mm以内。
在本研究中,对SI和CI技术进行了测试,以提供一种测量射波刀®射束形状的有效方法。同时,SI和CI的系统比较也为适当选择测量方法提供了依据。