Performance of electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) used in radiotherapy:: Image quality and dose measurements

被引:47
作者
Cremers, F [1 ]
Frenzel, T [1 ]
Kausch, C [1 ]
Albers, D [1 ]
Schönborn, T [1 ]
Schmidt, R [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Hamburg Hosp, Clin Radiotherapy & Radiooncol, D-20246 Hamburg, Germany
关键词
portal imaging; image quality; amorphous silicon array; fluoroscopic portal imaging system; response; dosimetry; radiation therapy;
D O I
10.1118/1.1688212
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
The aim of our Study was to compare the image and dosimetric quality of two different imaging systems. The first one is a fluoroscopic electronic portal imaging device (first generation), while the second is based on an amorphous silicon flat-panel array (second generation). The parameters describing image quality include spatial resolution [modulation transfer function (MTF)], noise [noise power spectrum (NPS)], and signal-to-noise transfer [detective quantum efficiency (DQE)]. The dosimetric measurements were compared with ionization chamber as well as with film measurements. The response of the flat-panel imager and the fluoroscopic-optical device was determined performing a two-step Monte Carlo simulation. All measurements were performed in a 6 MV linear accelerator photon beam. The resolution (MTF) of the fluoroscopic device (f(1/2) = 0.3 mm(-1)) is larger than of the amorphous silicon based system (f(1/2) = 0.21 mm(-1)), which is due to the missing backscattered photons and the smaller pixel size. The noise measurements (NPS) show the correlation of neighboring pixels of the amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device, whereas the NPS of the fluoroscopic system is frequency independent. At zero spatial frequency the DQE of the flat-panel imager has a value of 0.008 (0.8%). Due to the minor frequency dependency this device may be almost x-ray quantum limited. Monte Carlo simulations verified these characteristics. For the fluoroscopic imaging system the DQE at low frequencies is about 0.0008 (0.08%) and degrades with higher frequencies. Dose measurements with the flat-panel imager revealed that images can only be directly converted to portal dose images, if scatter can be neglected. Thus objects distant to the detector (e.g., inhomogeneous dose distribution generated by a modificator) can be verified dosimetrically, while objects close to a detector (e.g., a patient) cannot be verified directly and must be scatter corrected prior to verification. This is justified by the response of the flat-panel imaging device revealing a strong dependency at low energies. (C) 2004 American Association of PhYsicists in Medicine.
引用
收藏
页码:985 / 996
页数:12
相关论文
共 50 条
[31]   Clinical Feasibility of Using an Electronic Portal Imaging Device for Position Verification during Conventional Radiotherapy [J].
Shen, Yuxiaotong ;
Zhang, Jie ;
Ge, Yun ;
Chen, Ying ;
Li, Haiwei ;
Sun, Wei ;
Ji, Mingxi ;
Wei, Quanbo ;
Cai, Jing ;
Li, Bing .
2016 IEEE 10TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON NANO/MOLECULAR MEDICINE AND ENGINEERING (NANOMED), 2016, :99-103
[32]   Quality assurance of MLC leaf position accuracy and relative dose effect at the MLC abutment region using an electronic portal imaging device [J].
Sumida, Iori ;
Yamaguchi, Hajime ;
Kizaki, Hisao ;
Koizumi, Masahiko ;
Ogata, Toshiyuki ;
Takahashi, Yutaka ;
Yoshioka, Yasuo .
JOURNAL OF RADIATION RESEARCH, 2012, 53 (05) :798-806
[33]   Electronic Portal Imaging Device-Based Three-Dimensional Volumetric Dosimetry for Intensity-modulated Radiotherapy Pretreatment Quality Assurance [J].
Arjunan, Manikandan ;
Sekaran, Sureka Chandra ;
Sarkar, Biplab ;
Manavalan, Saran Kumar .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2019, 44 (03) :176-184
[34]   A generalized calibration procedure for in vivo transit dosimetry using siemens electronic portal imaging devices [J].
Fidanzio, Andrea ;
Greco, Francesca ;
Gargiulo, Laura ;
Cilla, Savino ;
Sabatino, Domenico ;
Cappiello, Massimo ;
Di Felice, Cinzia ;
Di Castro, Elisabetta ;
Azario, Luigi ;
Russo, Mariateresa ;
Pompei, Luciano ;
D'Onofrio, Guido ;
Piermattei, Angelo .
MEDICAL & BIOLOGICAL ENGINEERING & COMPUTING, 2011, 49 (03) :373-383
[35]   Quality assurance of linear accelerator: a comprehensive system using electronic portal imaging device [J].
Niyas, P. ;
Abdullah, K. K. ;
Noufal, M. P. ;
Vysakh, R. .
JOURNAL OF RADIOTHERAPY IN PRACTICE, 2019, 18 (02) :138-149
[36]   Analysis of dose distribution reproducibility based on a fluence map of in vivo transit dose using an electronic portal imaging device [J].
Tardi, Didin ;
Fitriandini, Aninda ;
Fauziah, Annisa Rahma ;
Wibowo, Wahyu Edy ;
Siswantining, Titin ;
Pawiro, Supriyanto Ardjo .
BIOMEDICAL PHYSICS & ENGINEERING EXPRESS, 2024, 10 (01)
[37]   Effect of subject motion and gantry rotation speed on image quality and dose delivery in CT-guided radiotherapy [J].
Hrinivich, William T. ;
Chernavsky, Nicole E. ;
Morcos, Marc ;
Li, Taoran ;
Wu, Pengwei ;
Wong, John ;
Siewerdsen, Jeffrey H. .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2022, 49 (11) :6840-6855
[38]   Assessment of MRI image quality for various setup positions used in breast radiotherapy planning [J].
Batumalai, Vikneswary ;
Liney, Gary ;
Delaney, Geoff P. ;
Rai, Robba ;
Boxer, Miriam ;
Min, Myo ;
Berry, Megan ;
Trang Pham ;
Phan, Penny ;
Choong, Callie ;
Rennie, Melanie ;
Chan, Christine ;
Holloway, Lois .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2016, 119 (01) :57-60
[39]   Biomechanical quality assurance criteria for deformable image registration algorithms used in radiotherapy guidance [J].
Zachiu, Cornel ;
de Senneville, Baudouin Denis ;
Raaymakers, Bas W. ;
Ries, Mario .
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY, 2020, 65 (01)
[40]   Imaging dose and secondary cancer risk in image-guided radiotherapy of pediatric patients [J].
Dzierma, Yvonne ;
Mikulla, Katharina ;
Richter, Patrick ;
Bell, Katharina ;
Melchior, Patrick ;
Nuesken, Frank ;
Ruebe, Christian .
RADIATION ONCOLOGY, 2018, 13