Halcyon Clinical Performance Evaluation: A Log File-Based Study in Comparison with a C-arm Linac.

Ruoxi Wang,Yi Du,Kaining Yao,Zhuolun Liu,Hanlin Wang,Haizhen Yue,Yibao Zhang,Hao Wu
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmp.2020.01.023
IF: 3.119
2020-01-01
Physica Medica
Abstract:Purpose: The aim of this study is to compare the dosimetric and mechanical accuracy of Volumetric Modulation Arc Therapy (VMAT) delivery on the Halcyon, a recent ring-shaped Treatment Delivery System (TDS) featuring fast rotating gantry, with a conventional C-arm Linac. Methods: The comparison was performed via log file analysis, where mechanical parameters of related components was extracted. 480 and 3951 VMAT log files of clinically delivered fractions from a Halcyon and a TrueBeam Linac were analyzed respectively. The relations between mechanical parameters and errors were extensively explored to further investigate the differences between the two Linacs. The mechanical parameter fluctuations were taken into account for dose recalculations, and the Dose Volume Parameters (DVP) on the PTV were evaluated to quantify such dosimetric variations. Results: The Multi-Leaf Collimator (MLC) leaf mean Root Mean Square (RMS) errors were 0.028 mm and 0.031 mm for Halcyon and TrueBeam respectively. Maximum systematic error on the MLC leaves introduced by the gravity effect were 0.04 mm and 0.01 mm for the Halcyon and TrueBeam respectively. Thanks to the O-ring design, the Halcyon achieved 0.035 degrees in mean RMS error in gantry angle compared with the 0.065 degrees of the TrueBeam. Overall mechanical errors introduced similar levels of dose-volume parameter variations (about 0.1%) on both Linacs. Conclusion: The Halcyon TDS can achieve similar mechanical leaf positioning accuracy compared with the TrueBeam TDS with a doubled delivery speed. In terms of dosimetric accuracy, The DVP standard deviations on the studied TB are generally larger than that on the Halcyon.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?