open access
Evaluation of mechanical and geometric accuracy of two different image guidance systems in radiotherapy
open access
Abstract
Aim
To assess the mechanical and the geometric accuracy of two different clinically used image guidance systems in radiotherapy for a period of 6 months.
Background
With the image guidance procedures being routine in the clinical radiotherapy department, the quality assurance tests for these systems become essential. The mechanical and geometric accuracy of these systems are crucial since it directly affects patient treatment set-up and delivery.
Materials and methods
We have assessed the mechanical and the geometric accuracy of two different image guidance systems (MV and kV based), being used clinically for a period of 6 months. The quality assurance tests such as imager positioning/repositioning, imaging and treatment beam isocentre coincidence, imager mechanical alignment, image scaling, geometric accuracy of cone beam computed tomography system, automatic image registration and offset calculation accuracy were assessed in this period.
Results
It was found that both systems were mechanically and geometrically accurate within ±2[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]mm in this period.
Conclusion
The quality assurance tests for MV based image guidance system were simple compared to kV based systems. We recommend performing periodic quality assurance tests to verify the integrity of both image guidance systems.
Abstract
Aim
To assess the mechanical and the geometric accuracy of two different clinically used image guidance systems in radiotherapy for a period of 6 months.
Background
With the image guidance procedures being routine in the clinical radiotherapy department, the quality assurance tests for these systems become essential. The mechanical and geometric accuracy of these systems are crucial since it directly affects patient treatment set-up and delivery.
Materials and methods
We have assessed the mechanical and the geometric accuracy of two different image guidance systems (MV and kV based), being used clinically for a period of 6 months. The quality assurance tests such as imager positioning/repositioning, imaging and treatment beam isocentre coincidence, imager mechanical alignment, image scaling, geometric accuracy of cone beam computed tomography system, automatic image registration and offset calculation accuracy were assessed in this period.
Results
It was found that both systems were mechanically and geometrically accurate within ±2[[ce:hsp sp="0.25"/]]mm in this period.
Conclusion
The quality assurance tests for MV based image guidance system were simple compared to kV based systems. We recommend performing periodic quality assurance tests to verify the integrity of both image guidance systems.
Keywords
Image guidance; Mechanical and geometric accuracy; Quality assurance


Title
Evaluation of mechanical and geometric accuracy of two different image guidance systems in radiotherapy
Journal
Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy
Issue
Pages
259-265
Published online
2016-05-01
DOI
10.1016/j.rpor.2015.11.005
Bibliographic record
Rep Pract Oncol Radiother 2016;21(3):259-265.
Keywords
Image guidance
Mechanical and geometric accuracy
Quality assurance
Authors
Nithya Kanakavelu
Anand Mambakam Ravindran
Emmanvelrajan James Samuel