Encrypted login | home

Program Information

Inaccurate Positioning Might Introduce Significant MapCheck Calibration Error in Flatten Filter Free Beams

no image available
S Wang

S Wang1*, C Chao1,2,3 , J Chang1,3 , (1) Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, (2) Columbia University, New York, NY, (3) New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY


SU-E-T-377 Sunday 3:00PM - 6:00PM Room: Exhibit Hall

Purpose: This study investigates the calibration error of detector sensitivity for MapCheck due to inaccurate positioning of the device, which is not taken into account by the current commercial iterative calibration algorithm. We hypothesize the calibration is more vulnerable to the positioning error for the flatten filter free (FFF) beams than the conventional flatten filter flattened beams.

Methods: MapCheck2 was calibrated with 10MV conventional and FFF beams, with careful alignment and with 1cm positioning error during calibration, respectively. Open fields of 37cmx37cm were delivered to gauge the impact of resultant calibration errors. The local calibration error was modeled as a detector independent multiplication factor, with which propagation error was estimated with positioning error from 1mm to 1cm. The calibrated sensitivities, without positioning error, were compared between the conventional and FFF beams to evaluate the dependence on the beam type.

Results: The 1cm positioning error leads to 0.39% and 5.24% local calibration error in the conventional and FFF beams respectively. After propagating to the edges of MapCheck, the calibration errors become 6.5% and 57.7%, respectively. The propagation error increases almost linearly with respect to the positioning error. The difference of sensitivities between the conventional and FFF beams was small (0.11 ± 0.49%).

Conclusion: The results demonstrate that the positioning error is not handled by the current commercial calibration algorithm of MapCheck. Particularly, the calibration errors for the FFF beams are ~9 times greater than those for the conventional beams with identical positioning error, and a small 1mm positioning error might lead to up to 8% calibration error. Since the sensitivities are only slightly dependent of the beam type and the conventional beam is less affected by the positioning error, it is advisable to cross-check the sensitivities between the conventional and FFF beams to detect potential calibration errors due to inaccurate positioning.

Funding Support, Disclosures, and Conflict of Interest: This work was partially supported by a DOD Grant No. DOD W81XWH1010862.

Contact Email: