S. Guru Prasad, Ph.D., DABR

Similar documents
Spiral CT. Protocol Optimization & Quality Assurance. Ge Wang, Ph.D. Department of Radiology University of Iowa Iowa City, Iowa 52242, USA

Lucy Phantom MR Grid Evaluation

ImPACT. Information Leaflet No. 1: CT Scanner Acceptance Testing

C a t p h a n / T h e P h a n t o m L a b o r a t o r y

Slide 1. Technical Aspects of Quality Control in Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Slide 2. Annual Compliance Testing. of MRI Systems.

CLASS HOURS: 4 CREDIT HOURS: 4 LABORATORY HOURS: 0

Design and performance characteristics of a Cone Beam CT system for Leksell Gamma Knife Icon

Optimization of CT Simulation Imaging. Ingrid Reiser Dept. of Radiology The University of Chicago

Quality control phantoms and protocol for a tomography system

Automated Image Analysis Software for Quality Assurance of a Radiotherapy CT Simulator

7/31/2011. Learning Objective. Video Positioning. 3D Surface Imaging by VisionRT

MEDICAL EQUIPMENT: COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY. Prof. Yasser Mostafa Kadah

CT Protocol Review: Practical Tips for the Imaging Physicist Physicist

Optimisation of Toshiba Aquilion ONE Volume Imaging

Basics of treatment planning II

Micro-CT Methodology Hasan Alsaid, PhD

ISO ISO ISO OHSAS ISO

INSTRUCTIONS RPD INFORMATION RPD PRODUCT INFORMATION. Address 5218 Barthel Industrial Drive Albertville, MN Website

SYSTEM LINEARITY LAB MANUAL: 2 Modifications for P551 Fall 2013 Medical Physics Laboratory

Lorad FFDM QC Procedures for Medical Physicist. Tao Wu, Ph.D. Hologic, Inc.

Michael Speiser, Ph.D.

ViewRay System Commissioning

Evaluation of AutoQA Lite TM Image Quality Measurement Software

International Journal of Innovative Research in Advanced Engineering (IJIRAE) ISSN:

1. Deployment of a framework for drawing a correspondence between simple figure of merits (FOM) and quantitative imaging performance in CT.

Conflicts of Interest Nuclear Medicine and PET physics reviewer for the ACR Accreditation program

Assessment of 3D performance metrics. X-ray based Volumetric imaging systems: Fourier-based imaging metrics. The MTF in CT

AAPM Standard of Practice: CT Protocol Review Physicist

1.1. FireCR Calibration

1. Learn to incorporate QA for surface imaging

James R Halama, PhD Loyola University Medical Center

Spectral analysis of non-stationary CT noise

INTRODUCTION TO MEDICAL IMAGING- 3D LOCALIZATION LAB MANUAL 1. Modifications for P551 Fall 2013 Medical Physics Laboratory

Proton dose calculation algorithms and configuration data

ImPACT. CT dosimetry and a data base for CTDI values. EFOMP Workshop at ECR Imaging Performance Assessment of CT Scanners

Deviceless respiratory motion correction in PET imaging exploring the potential of novel data driven strategies

Discontinued Products

Comparison of Two Phantoms for End-to-End SRS/SBRT Testing. Vikren Sarkar, Ph.D. Associate Professor University of Utah Huntsman Cancer Center

Photon counting spectral CT versus conventional CT: comparative evaluation for breast imaging application

Evaluation report. X-ray tomographic image guided radiotherapy systems CEP10071

Basic Radiation Oncology Physics

SUMMARY OF DENTAL MEASUREMENT PROCEDURES (Abridged Protocol)

Evaluation of the Elekta Synergy concept for patient positioning in image guided radiotherapy

DUE to beam polychromacity in CT and the energy dependence

A study on image quality provided by a kilovoltage cone-beam computed tomography

A prototype table-top inverse-geometry volumetric CT system

URGENT IMPORTANT FIELD SAFETY NOTIFICATION

Comparison of Scatter Correction Methods for CBCT. Author(s): Suri, Roland E.; Virshup, Gary; Kaissl, Wolfgang; Zurkirchen, Luis

Tomotherapy Physics. Machine Twinning and Quality Assurance. Emilie Soisson, MS

New Technology in Radiation Oncology. James E. Gaiser, Ph.D. DABR Physics and Computer Planning Charlotte, NC

Corso di laurea in Fisica A.A Fisica Medica 4 TC

Protocol. Technical evaluation of X-ray tomographic image-guided radiotherapy devices CEP10070

Machine and Physics Data Guide

GafChromic Protocol Multi-Channel Film Dosimetry + Gamma Map Analysis

Thank-You Members of TG147 TG 147: QA for nonradiographic

Code of practice: Create a verification plan for OCTAVIUS Detector 729 in Philips Pinnacle³

Biomedical Imaging. Computed Tomography. Patrícia Figueiredo IST

CBCT Equivalent Source Generation Using HVL and Beam Profile Measurements. Johnny Little PSM - Medical Physics Graduate Student University of Arizona

TEP Hounsfield units. Related topics Attenuation coefficient, Hounsfield units

Introduction to Biomedical Imaging

Performance Evaluation of the Philips Gemini PET/CT System

Some reference material

Agenda : Lung Density Breakout Session

8/2/2016. Measures the degradation/distortion of the acquired image (relative to an ideal image) using a quantitative figure-of-merit

RITtrend allows you to effectively manage all your physics QA data in one powerful and customizable package.

3/27/2012 WHY SPECT / CT? SPECT / CT Basic Principles. Advantages of SPECT. Advantages of CT. Dr John C. Dickson, Principal Physicist UCLH

ACMP 25th Annual Meeting

SPECT QA and QC. Bruce McBride St. Vincent s Hospital Sydney.

Scatter Correction for Dual source Cone beam CT Using the Pre patient Grid. Yingxuan Chen. Graduate Program in Medical Physics Duke University

Correlation between Model and Human Observer Performance on a Lesion Shape Discrimination Task in CT

Shadow casting. What is the problem? Cone Beam Computed Tomography THE OBJECTIVES OF DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING IDEAL DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING STUDY LIMITATIONS

CT Dose Profiler. Probe for evaluation of CT systems. CT Dose Profiler User's Manual - English - Version 6.4A. RTI article number:

TomoTherapy Related Projects. An image guidance alternative on Tomo Low dose MVCT reconstruction Patient Quality Assurance using Sinogram

TG-148 overview. Introduction. System Overview. System Overview. QA for Helical Tomotherapy: Report of the AAPM Task Group 148. Conflict of Interest:

THE WIRELESS PHANTOM PERFORM ACCURATE PATIENT QA IN LESS TIME THAN EVER!

Estimating 3D Respiratory Motion from Orbiting Views

Philips SPECT/CT Systems

Photon beam dose distributions in 2D

Automated Quality Assurance for Image-Guided Radiation Therapy

Monte Carlo methods in proton beam radiation therapy. Harald Paganetti

Kevin O Donnell Senior R&D Manager Toshiba Medical Research Institute Co-Chair, DICOM Standards Committee Past Chair, IHE Radiology Planning

Radiology. Marta Anguiano Millán. Departamento de Física Atómica, Molecular y Nuclear Facultad de Ciencias. Universidad de Granada

Dose Distributions. Purpose. Isodose distributions. To familiarize the resident with dose distributions and the factors that affect them

Shielding factors for traditional safety glasses

Effects of the difference in tube voltage of the CT scanner on. dose calculation

MapCHECK 2 & 3DVH. The Gold Standard for 2D Arrays

DICOM Correction Item

MapCHECK 2 & 3DVH The Gold Standard for 2D Arrays

CT vs. VolumeScope: image quality and dose comparison

DUAL energy CT (DECT) is a modality where one and. Empirical Dual Energy Calibration (EDEC) for Cone-Beam Computed Tomography

Loma Linda University Medical Center Dept. of Radiation Medicine

A Study of Motion Tracking Accuracy of Robotic Radiosurgery Using a Novel CCD Camera Based End-to-end Test System

CT Basics Principles of Spiral CT Dose. Always Thinking Ahead.

RECENTLY APPROVED GE FFDM DBT TESTING PROCEDURES.

PET-CT in Radiation Treatment Planning

Acceptance Testing and Commissioning of Monte Carlo Dose Calculation Systems. Bruce Curran University of Michigan Medical Center Ann Arbor, MI

Annexure XII SPECIFICATIONS FOR A NEW STATE OF ART 16 SLICE ALL PURPOSE C. T. SCANNER

IAEA-TECDOC-1583 Commissioning of Radiotherapy Treatment Planning Systems: Testing for Typical External Beam Treatment Techniques

Raising the Bar in IMRT QA

Unique Features of the GE Senoclaire Tomosynthesis System. Tyler Fisher, M.S., DABR Therapy Physics, Inc.

Transcription:

PURPOSE S. Guru Prasad, Ph.D., DABR Director of Medical Physics IAEA Consultant NorthShore University Health System and University of Chicago, Pritzker School of Medicine Current TPS utilize more information from CT simulators and Virtual simulators than in the past These new requirements mandate a QA program to ensure CT data accuracy With new treatment options; dose escalation, SBRT, and SRS this procedure is of increasing importance CT GANTRY GANTRY CONTROL 1

AREAS OF INTEREST Geometric accuracy and reproducibility Laser alignment High contrast resolution and low contrast sensitivity Field uniformity and noise GEOMETRIC ACCURACY Three dimensions (x,y,z) Scanning of a device of known dimensions Utilization of the scanners measurement tools X and Y dimensions Incrementing the table a known distance Z dimension CT number linearity Scan technique mas versus SNR PROCEDURE X dimension CT Marker wires are placed on a laser QA tool at a known distance apart GEOMETRIC ACCURACY 2

PROCEDURE GEOMETRIC ACCURACY X dimension CT Marker wires are placed on a laser QA tool at a known distance apart Y dimension CT Marker wire is placed on a device in the vertical direction at a known distance PROCEDURE GEOMETRIC ACCURACY X dimension CT Marker wires are placed on a laser QA tool at a known distance apart Y dimension CT Marker wire is placed on a device in the vertical direction at a known distance Z dimension CT Marker BB s s are placed a known distance from the central axis 3

PROCEDURE GEOMETRIC ACCURACY X and Y Scanning of laser QA tool Suggested technique: 120 kv 80 ma 1-2mm 1 slice Three scans are performed, one each at superior, central axis and the inferior BB locations. Geometric accuracy in three dimensions can be measured GEOMETRIC ACCURACY Z Position LASER ALIGNMENT Scanning of laser QA device can also be used to check accuracy of laser alignment to imaging isocenter 4

LASER ALIGNMENT PROCEDURE Align laser QA tool to internal CT lasers Scan a single axial slice of 1-21 2 mm A CT marker BB placed on the device is used to mark the isocenter The crosshair tool is used to measure the coordinates of the laser isocenter LASER ALIGNMENT LASER ALIGNMENT An intentional offset of 2 mm to the Sagittal laser demonstrates the sensitivity of the test 5

SAGITTAL LASER FAILURE FIELD UNIFORMITY and NOISE Position the C.T. head phantom centered in the gantry. Using 1 cm slice thickness, obtain one scan using typical head technique. Select a circular region of interest of approximately 400 sq. mm. And record the mean C.T. number and standard deviation for each of the positions 1 through 5 FIELD UNIFORMITY FIELD UNIFORMITY kvp ma seconds Position Mean C.T. # S.D. C.V. 1 2 3 4 5 6

FIELD UNIFORMITY and NOISE CT# of water should be within +/- 5 HU of zero across field Range of kvp should be tested if applicable The standard deviation of each ROI is a measure of noise Determine the SNR as a ratio of mean to SDV This value should be constant over a period of time HIGH and LOW CONTRAST Use of a phantom such as the ACR or an acceptable CT performance phantom Set up the mini C.T. performance phantom Select the section containing the high resolution test objects Select the head technique Perform a single transverse scan Select the area containing the high resolution test objects and zoom as necessary Select appropriate window and level for the best visualization of the test objects Record the smallest test object visualized on the monitor HIGH and LOW CONTRAST CT # SET UP 7

HIGH CONTRAST RESOLUTION HIGH CONTRAST RESOLUTION LOW CONTRAST RESOLUTION LOW CONTRAST SENSITIVITY Select the section containing the low resolution test objects in the mini phantom. Perform a single transverse scan utilizing the same technique as high resolution 8

CT NUMBER LINEARITY Plot of expected versus measured CT# Procedure Determination of energy» Measurement of HVL of Al -> > linear attenuation coefficient» Determination of energy from lookup table of energy dependant linear attenuation coefficients Calculation of expected CT#» CT# = K(µ(E) (E) - µ(e)water) / µ(e)water» K: Scaling factor, typically value of 1000 Measurement» Scan of device with many different materials of known electron density CT NUMBER LINEARITY SCAN TECHNIQUE Ensure that the scan technique used is appropriate Plot of mas versus SNR 80.00 60.00 SCAN TECHNIQUE Relationship of SNR and Increase in mas y = 0.1774x + 19.127 R 2 = 0.9964 S N R 40.00 20.00 y = 0.1293x + 23.942 R 2 = 0.9605 0.00 0.0 75.0 150.0 225.0 300.0 375.0 mas 9

MSAD / CTDI SET UP / DOSE PHANTOM Set up the dose phantom as shown in the figure Connect pencil chamber Select head technique, 120 kvp, 170 ma and 2 seconds, 10mm slice thickness Perform four scans in this position. record the exposure in mr MSAD Skull Technique Run Number Exposure e in mr kvp 1 ma 2 Scan Time Sec 3 Slice Thickness 10 mm 4 Slice Increment = 0 Mean Exp./SD/ COV MSAD = (E x f x K x L)/T E = Average exposure reading F = Factor to convert exposure in air to absorbed dose Mean Exposure F = 0.00078 rad / mr K = Calibration factor of radiation measuring system K=1 L = Effective length (mm) of radiation measuring system T = Tomographic slice thickness in mm CTDI CTDI = E*f*L*C/N*T N = number of slices Calculated MSAD = rad 10