Nevertheless, daily measurements should be performed on CyberKnife unit since high radiation dose per fraction is usually delivered to target volume
📌 3 Key Takeaways
🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of the present study was to investigate dosimetric and mechanical stability of CyberKnife Robotic Radiosurgery System (Accuray Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) in short- and longterm period.METHODSOutput factor measurements and automated quality assurance (AQA) tests performed on CyberKnife unit 2009-2013 at radiation oncology department of Hacettepe University, Turkey, were analyzed retrospectively.RESULTSAccording to the analysis, more than 95% of the output measurements over 5 years were within the tolerance limit ≤2%.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In AQA test analysis, 144 AQA test results were within the tolerance limit from 2009 to 2011.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Nevertheless, daily measurements should be performed on CyberKnife unit since high radiation dose per fraction is usually delivered to target volume
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2009-2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to investigate dosimetric and mechanical stability of CyberKnife Robotic Radiosurgery System (Accuray Inc., Sunnyvale, CA, USA) in short- and longterm period.METHODSOutput factor measurements and automated quality assurance (AQA) tests performed on CyberKnife unit 2009-2013 at radiation oncology department of Hacettepe University, Turkey, were analyzed retrospectively.RESULTSAccording to the analysis, more than 95% of the output measurements over 5 years were within the tolerance limit ≤2%. In AQA test analysis, 144 AQA test results were within the tolerance limit from 2009 to 2011. However, 7 of the 51 measurements taken in 2012, and 4 of the 47 measurements performed in 2013 exceeded 1 mm radial error.CONCLUSIONOutput and AQA data of CyberKnife system indicate that it is quite stable in daily and long-term period. Nevertheless, daily measurements should be performed on CyberKnife unit since high radiation dose per fraction is usually delivered to target volume
🔖
Cite This Article
DOĞAN, A., YEĞİNER, M., BİLTEKİN, F., YAZICI, G., CENGİZ, M., ÜNLÜ, B., ÖZYİĞİT, G. (2022). Dosimetric and Mechanical Stability of CyberKnife Robotic Radiosurgery Unit: 5 Years’ Clinical Experience. Türk Onkoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 31 - Sayı: 2, 45–50. https://ajindex.com/articles/639297
Sanghangthum T, Suriyapee S, Srisatit S, Pawlicki T. Retrospective analysis of linear accelerator output constancy checks using process control techniques. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2013;14(1):4032
Kapanen M, Bly R, Sipilä P, Järvinen H, Tenhunen M. How can a cost/benefit ratio be optimized for an output measurement program of external photon radiotherapy beams? Phys Med Biol 2011;56(7):2119–30
Huq MS, Fraass BA, Dunscombe PB, Gibbons JP Jr, Ibbott GS, Medin PM, et al. A method for evaluating quality assurance needs in radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008;71(1 Suppl):170–3
Kapanen M, Tenhunen M, Hämäläinen T, Sipilä P, Parkkinen R, Järvinen H. Analysis of quality control data of eight modern radiotherapy linear accelerators: the short- and long-term behaviours of the outputs and the reproducibility of quality control measurements. Phys Med Biol 2006;51(14):3581–92
Institution of Physics and Engineering in Medicine and Biology (IPEMB). Physical aspects of quality control in radiotherapy. IPEMB Report 81. New York: 1999
Kutcher GJ, Coia L, Gillin M, Hanson WF, Leibel S, Morton RJ, et al. Comprehensive QA for radiation oncology: report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 40. Med Phys 1994;21(4):581–618
Netherlands Commission on Radiation Dosimetry (NCS). Quality control of medical linear accelerators: current practice and minimum requirements. NCS Report 9. Delft 1996
Swiss Society of Radiobiology and Medical Physics (SSRMP/SGSMP). Quality control of medical electron accelerators. SSRMP Recommendations No.11. Bern 2003
World Health Organisation (WHO). Quality Assurance in Radiotherapy. Geneva 1988. 10.Biggs PJ. Review of the energy check of an electron-only linear accelerator over a 6 year period: sensitivity of the technique to energy shift. Med Phys 2003;30(4):635–9. 11.Pawlicki T, Whitaker M, Boyer AL. Statistical process control for radiotherapy quality assurance. Med Phys 2005;32(9):2777–86. 12.Benneyan JC, Lloyd RC, Plsek PE. Statistical process control as a tool for research and healthcare improvement. Qual Saf Health Care 2003;12(6):458–64. 13.Noyez L. Control charts, Cusum techniques and funnel plots. A review of methods for monitoring performance in healthcare. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2009;9(3):494–9. 14.Tennant R, Mohammed MA, Coleman JJ, Martin U. Monitoring patients using control charts: a systematic review. Int J Qual Health Care 2007;19(4):187–94. 15.Boggs PB, Wheeler D, Washburne