Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Towards online patient imaging during helical radiotherapy

  • Scientific Paper
  • Published:
Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Exit-detector data from helical radiation therapy have been studied extensively for delivery verification and dose reconstruction. Since the same radiation source is used for both imaging and treatment, this work investigates the possibility of utilising exit-detector raw data for imaging purposes. This gives rise to potential clinical applications such as retrospective daily setup verification and inter-fractional setup error detection. The exit-detector raw data were acquired and independently analysed using Python programming language. The raw data were extracted from the treatment machine’s onboard computer, and converted into 2D array files. The contours of objects (phantom or patient) were acquired by applying a logarithmic function to the ratio of two sinograms, one with the object in the beam and one without. The setup variation between any two treatment deliveries can be detected by applying the same function to their corresponding exit-detector sinograms. The contour of the object was well defined by the secondary radiation from the treatment beam and validated with the imaging beam, although no internal structures were discernible due to the interference from the primary radiation. The sensitivity of the setup variation detection was down to 2 mm, which was mainly limited by the resolution of the exit-detector itself. The exit-detector data from treatment procedures contain valuable photon exit fluence maps which can be utilised for contour definition and verification of patient alignment without reconstruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fraass BA (2008) Errors in radiotherapy: motivation for development of new radiotherapy quality assurance paradigms. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 71(1 Suppl):S162–S165

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kron T (2012) New developments in image guidance for radiotherapy. Cancer forum. The Cancer Council Australia, Sydney, p 82

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kapatoes JM, Olivera GH, Balog JP, Keller H, Reckwerdt PJ, Mackie TR (2001) On the accuracy and effectiveness of dose reconstruction for tomotherapy. Phys Med Biol 46(4):943–966

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kapatoes JM, Olivera GH, Reckwerdt PJ, Fitchard EE, Schloesser EA, Mackie TR (1999) Delivery verification in sequential and helical tomotherapy. Phys Med Biol 44(7):1815–1841

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kapatoes JM, Olivera GH, Ruchala KJ, Mackie TR (2001) On the verification of the incident energy fluence in tomotherapy IMRT. Phys Med Biol 46(11):2953–2965

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kapatoes JM, Olivera GH, Ruchala KJ, Smilowitz JB, Reckwerdt PJ, Mackie TR (2001) A feasible method for clinical delivery verification and dose reconstruction in tomotherapy. Med Phys 28(4):528–542

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Sheng K, Jones R, Yang W, Saraiya S, Schneider B, Chen Q, Sobering G, Olivera G, Read P (2012) 3D dose verification using tomotherapy CT detector array. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 82(2):1013–1020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen Q, Westerly D, Fang Z, Sheng K, Chen Y (2012) Tomotherapy MLC verification using exit detector data. Med Phys 39(1):143–152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wooten HO, Goddu SM, Rodriguez V, Cates J, Grigsby P, Low DA (2012) The use of exit detector sinograms to detect anatomical variations for patients extending beyond the tomotherapy field of view: a feasibility study. Med Phys 39(10):6407–6419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. McDermott LN, Wendling M, Sonke J-J, van Herk M, Mijnheer BJ (2006) Anatomy changes in radiotherapy detected using portal imaging. Radiother Oncol 79(2):211–217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ruchala K, Olivera G, Kapatoes J, Schloesser E, Reckwerdt P, Mackie T (2000) Megavoltage CT image reconstruction during tomotherapy treatments. Phys Med Biol 45(12):3545

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ruchala K, Olivera G, Kapatoes J, Schloesser E, Reckwerdt P, Mackie T (2000) Megavoltage CT imaging as a by-product of multileaf collimator leakage. Phys Med Biol 45(7):N61

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. TomoTherapy (2009) Hi·Art® Treatment system delivery quality assurance version 4.0.x 102515B

  14. Maini R, Aggarwal H (2009) Study and comparison of various image edge detection techniques. IJIP 3(1):1–11

    Google Scholar 

  15. Langen KM, Papanikolaou N, Balog J, Crilly R, Followill D, Goddu SM, Grant W III, Olivera G, Ramsey CR, Shi C (2010) QA for helical tomotherapy: report of the AAPM Task Group 148. Med Phys 37(9):4817–4853

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bushberg JT, Boone JM (2011) The essential physics of medical imaging. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Mr. Jong Gi Lee from Elekta for providing technical access to raw exit-detector data.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. Yu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yu, L., Poole, C.M., Lancaster, C.M. et al. Towards online patient imaging during helical radiotherapy. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 38, 119–128 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-015-0331-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-015-0331-z

Keywords

Navigation