首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics >Evaluation of semiempirical VMAT dose reconstruction on a patient dataset based on biplanar diode array measurements
【2h】

Evaluation of semiempirical VMAT dose reconstruction on a patient dataset based on biplanar diode array measurements

机译:基于双平面二极管阵列测量的患者数据集上的半经验VMAT剂量重建评估

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

We report the results of a preclinical evaluation of recently introduced commercial tools for 3D patient IMRT/VMAT dose reconstruction, the Delta4 Anatomy calculation algorithm. Based on the same initial measurement, volumetric dose can be reconstructed in two ways. Three‐dimensional dose on the Delta4 phantom can be obtained by renormalizing the planned dose distribution by the measurement values (D4 Interpolation). Alternatively, incident fluence can be approximated from the phantom measurement and used for volumetric dose calculation on an arbitrary (patient) dataset with a pencil beam algorithm (Delta4 PB). The primary basis for comparison was 3D dose obtained by previously validated measurement‐guided planned dose perturbation method (ACPDP), based on the ArcCHECK dosimeter with 3DVH software. For five clinical VMAT plans, D4 Interpolation agreed well with ACPDP on a homogeneous cylindrical phantom according to gamma analysis with local dose‐error normalization. The average agreement rates were 98.2%±1.3% (1 SD), (range 97.0%‐100%) and 92.8%±3.9% (89.5%‐99.2%), for the 3%/3mm and 2%/2mm criteria, respectively. On a similar geometric phantom, D4 PB demonstrated substantially lower agreement rates with ACPDP: 88.6%±6.8% (81.2%‐96.1%) and 72.4%±8.4% (62.1%‐81.1%), for 3%/3mm and 2%/2mm, respectively. The average agreement rates on the heterogeneous patients' CT datasets are lower yet: 81.2%±8.6% (70.4%‐90.4%) and 64.6%±8.4% (56.5%‐74.7%), respectively, for the same two criteria sets. For both threshold combinations, matched analysis of variance (ANOVA) multiple comparisons showed statistically significant differences in mean agreement rates (p<0.05) for D4 Interpolation versus ACPDP on one hand, and D4 PB versus ACPDP on either cylindrical or patient dataset on the other hand. Based on the favorable D4 Interpolation results for VMAT plans, the resolution of the reconstruction method rather than hardware design is likely to be responsible for D4 PB limitations.PACS number: 87.55Qr
机译:我们报告了最近推出的用于3D患者IMRT / VMAT剂量重建的商用工具Delta 4 解剖计算算法的临床前评估结果。基于相同的初始测量,可以通过两种方式重建体积剂量。通过用测量值(D4插值)对计划的剂量分布进行重新归一化,可以获得Delta 4 体模上的三维剂量。或者,可以从幻像测量中估算入射通量,并使用铅笔束算法(Delta 4 PB)将其用于任意(患者)数据集上的体积剂量计算。进行比较的主要依据是使用3DVH软件基于ArcCHECK剂量计,通过先前验证的测量指导的计划剂量扰动方法(ACPDP)获得的3D剂量。根据局部剂量误差归一化的伽马分析,对于五个临床VMAT计划,D4插值法与ACPDP在同质圆柱体模上吻合良好。平均协议率是 98.2 ± 1.3 (1 SD),(范围97.0%-100%)和 < mn> 92.8 ± 3.9 (占89.5% ‐99.2%),用于 3 / 3 mm < / math>和 <修剪> 2 < / mn> / 2 mm 准则。在类似的几何模型上,D4 PB与ACPDP的协议达成率大大降低: 88.6 ± 6.8 (81.2%‐96.1%)和 72.4 ± 8.4 (62.1%-81.1%),用于 < mrow> 3 / 3 mm < / mrow> < mn> 2 / 2 mm 。异类患者CT数据集的平均同意率还较低: 81.2 ± 8.6 (70.4%-90.4%)和 64.6 ± 8.4 p / mo> 0.05 )< / mo> 一方面用于D4内插与ACPDP,另一方面用于D4 PB与ACPDP在圆柱体或患者数据集中。基于VMAT计划的良好D4插值结果,重建方法的分辨率而非硬件设计可能是D4 PB局限性的原因.PACS编号:87.55Qr

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号