A novel EPID-based MLC QA method with log files achieving submillimeter accuracy.

The purpose of this study is to develop an electronic portal imaging device-based multi-leaf collimator calibration procedure using log files. Picket fence fields with 2-14 mm nominal strip widths were performed and normalized by open field. Normalized pixel intensity profiles along the direction of leaf motion for each leaf pair were taken. Three independent algorithms and an integration method derived from them were developed according to the valley value, valley area, full-width half-maximum (FWHM) of the profile, and the abutment width of the leaf pairs obtained from the log files. Three data processing schemes (Scheme A, Scheme B, and Scheme C) were performed based on different data processing methods. To test the usefulness and robustness of the algorithm, the known leaf position errors along the direction of perpendicular leaf motion via the treatment planning system were introduced in the picket fence field with nominal 5, 8, and 11 mm. Algorithm tests were performed every 2 weeks over 4 months. According to the log files, about 17.628% and 1.060% of the leaves had position errors beyond ± 0.1 and ± 0.2 mm, respectively. The absolute position errors of the algorithm tests for different data schemes were 0.062 ± 0.067 (Scheme A), 0.041 ± 0.045 (Scheme B), and 0.037 ± 0.043 (Scheme C). The absolute position errors of the algorithms developed by Scheme C were 0.054 ± 0.063 (valley depth method), 0.040 ± 0.038 (valley area method), 0.031 ± 0.031 (FWHM method), and 0.021 ± 0.024 (integrated method). For the efficiency and robustness test of the algorithm, the absolute position errors of the integration method of Scheme C were 0.020 ± 0.024 (5 mm), 0.024 ± 0.026 (8 mm), and 0.018 ± 0.024 (11 mm). Different data processing schemes could affect the accuracy of the developed algorithms. The integration method could integrate the benefits of each algorithm, which improved the level of robustness and accuracy of the algorithm. The integration method can perform multi-leaf collimator (MLC) quality assurance with an accuracy of 0.1 mm. This method is simple, effective, robust, quantitative, and can detect a wide range of MLC leaf position errors.

Assessing the dependency of the uncertainties in the Elekta Agility MLC calibration procedure on the focal spot position.

The effectiveness of radiotherapy treatments depends on the accuracy of the dose delivery process. The majority of radiotherapy courses are delivered on linear accelerators with a Multi Leaf Collimator (MLC) in 3D conformal Radiation Therapy, Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT) or Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) modes that require accurate MLC positioning. This study investigates the MLC calibration accuracy, following manufacturer procedures for an Elekta Synergy linac with the Agility head, against the radiation focal spot offset (alignment with the collimator axis of rotation). If the radiation focal spot is not aligned ideally with the collimator axis of rotation then a systematic error can be introduced into the calibration procedure affecting absolute MLC leaf positions. Calibration of diaphrams is equally affected; however they are not investigated here. The results indicate that an estimated 0.15 mm MLC uncertainty in all MLC leaves positions can be introduced due to uncertainty of the radiation focal spot position of 0.21 mm.