Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study

This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edg...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Zhenhui Dai [verfasserIn] Hua Zhang [verfasserIn] Yaoqin Xie [verfasserIn] Lin Zhu [verfasserIn] Bailin Zhang [verfasserIn] Chunya Cai [verfasserIn] Fei Li [verfasserIn] Geng Yang [verfasserIn] Huaizhi Jin [verfasserIn] Xuetao Wang [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2019

Schlagwörter:	Radiotherapy accuracy electromagnetic tracking

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: IEEE Access - IEEE, 2014, 7(2019), Seite 127693-127702
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:7 ; year:2019 ; pages:127693-127702

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ057683778

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ057683778
003	DE-627
005	20230501192241.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230227s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ057683778
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a TK1-9971
100	0		\|a Zhenhui Dai \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study
264		1	\|c 2019
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edge accelerator while the simulated tumor was simultaneously tracked with an EMT system using Calypso. The geometric accuracy was validated by comparing the motion trajectories derived from Calypso and 4D-CBCT with the ground truth from motion control software. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional dynamic doses were measured with the Matrixx and ArcCHECK installed on a motion platform, both with and without EMT. For tumor motion with 5, 7.5 mm amplitudes, the average absolute differences of sample position between Calypso and the ground truth were 0.286±0.234 mm, 0.407±0.331 mm respectively. Dosimetric accuracy was validated with 3 mm/3% gamma criterion. The average gamma pass rates of 2D dynamic dose validation based on Matrixx were less than 46% without EMT, 97.3% using 2 mm gating limit, 96% using 3 mm gating limit and 93.4% using 5mm gating limit respectively. The mean 3D dynamic dose validation pass rates based on ArcCHECK were 65.9% without EMT, 96.2% using 3 mm gating limit, and 92.5% using 5 mm gating limit with EMT respectively. The geometric accuracy of the Calypso system in tracking the moving target area was stable at the submillimeter level. The dosimetric accuracy could be improved significantly with EMT using an appropriate gating limit.
650		4	\|a Radiotherapy
650		4	\|a accuracy
650		4	\|a electromagnetic tracking
653		0	\|a Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering
700	0		\|a Hua Zhang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Yaoqin Xie \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Lin Zhu \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Bailin Zhang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Chunya Cai \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Fei Li \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Geng Yang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Huaizhi Jin \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Xuetao Wang \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t IEEE Access \|d IEEE, 2014 \|g 7(2019), Seite 127693-127702 \|w (DE-627)728440385 \|w (DE-600)2687964-5 \|x 21693536 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:7 \|g year:2019 \|g pages:127693-127702
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8794804/ \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 7 \|j 2019 \|h 127693-127702

Indexfelder

author_variant	z d zd h z hz y x yx l z lz b z bz c c cc f l fl g y gy h j hj x w xw
matchkey_str	article:21693536:2019----::aiainfemtiadoierccuayfdeceeaogtnwteetoa
hierarchy_sort_str	2019
callnumber-subject-code	TK
publishDate	2019
allfields	10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 doi (DE-627)DOAJ057683778 (DE-599)DOAJ8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng TK1-9971 Zhenhui Dai verfasserin aut Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edge accelerator while the simulated tumor was simultaneously tracked with an EMT system using Calypso. The geometric accuracy was validated by comparing the motion trajectories derived from Calypso and 4D-CBCT with the ground truth from motion control software. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional dynamic doses were measured with the Matrixx and ArcCHECK installed on a motion platform, both with and without EMT. For tumor motion with 5, 7.5 mm amplitudes, the average absolute differences of sample position between Calypso and the ground truth were 0.286±0.234 mm, 0.407±0.331 mm respectively. Dosimetric accuracy was validated with 3 mm/3% gamma criterion. The average gamma pass rates of 2D dynamic dose validation based on Matrixx were less than 46% without EMT, 97.3% using 2 mm gating limit, 96% using 3 mm gating limit and 93.4% using 5mm gating limit respectively. The mean 3D dynamic dose validation pass rates based on ArcCHECK were 65.9% without EMT, 96.2% using 3 mm gating limit, and 92.5% using 5 mm gating limit with EMT respectively. The geometric accuracy of the Calypso system in tracking the moving target area was stable at the submillimeter level. The dosimetric accuracy could be improved significantly with EMT using an appropriate gating limit. Radiotherapy accuracy electromagnetic tracking Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Hua Zhang verfasserin aut Yaoqin Xie verfasserin aut Lin Zhu verfasserin aut Bailin Zhang verfasserin aut Chunya Cai verfasserin aut Fei Li verfasserin aut Geng Yang verfasserin aut Huaizhi Jin verfasserin aut Xuetao Wang verfasserin aut In IEEE Access IEEE, 2014 7(2019), Seite 127693-127702 (DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5 21693536 nnns volume:7 year:2019 pages:127693-127702 https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 kostenfrei https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8794804/ kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 7 2019 127693-127702
spelling	10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 doi (DE-627)DOAJ057683778 (DE-599)DOAJ8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng TK1-9971 Zhenhui Dai verfasserin aut Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edge accelerator while the simulated tumor was simultaneously tracked with an EMT system using Calypso. The geometric accuracy was validated by comparing the motion trajectories derived from Calypso and 4D-CBCT with the ground truth from motion control software. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional dynamic doses were measured with the Matrixx and ArcCHECK installed on a motion platform, both with and without EMT. For tumor motion with 5, 7.5 mm amplitudes, the average absolute differences of sample position between Calypso and the ground truth were 0.286±0.234 mm, 0.407±0.331 mm respectively. Dosimetric accuracy was validated with 3 mm/3% gamma criterion. The average gamma pass rates of 2D dynamic dose validation based on Matrixx were less than 46% without EMT, 97.3% using 2 mm gating limit, 96% using 3 mm gating limit and 93.4% using 5mm gating limit respectively. The mean 3D dynamic dose validation pass rates based on ArcCHECK were 65.9% without EMT, 96.2% using 3 mm gating limit, and 92.5% using 5 mm gating limit with EMT respectively. The geometric accuracy of the Calypso system in tracking the moving target area was stable at the submillimeter level. The dosimetric accuracy could be improved significantly with EMT using an appropriate gating limit. Radiotherapy accuracy electromagnetic tracking Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Hua Zhang verfasserin aut Yaoqin Xie verfasserin aut Lin Zhu verfasserin aut Bailin Zhang verfasserin aut Chunya Cai verfasserin aut Fei Li verfasserin aut Geng Yang verfasserin aut Huaizhi Jin verfasserin aut Xuetao Wang verfasserin aut In IEEE Access IEEE, 2014 7(2019), Seite 127693-127702 (DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5 21693536 nnns volume:7 year:2019 pages:127693-127702 https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 kostenfrei https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8794804/ kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 7 2019 127693-127702
allfields_unstemmed	10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 doi (DE-627)DOAJ057683778 (DE-599)DOAJ8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng TK1-9971 Zhenhui Dai verfasserin aut Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edge accelerator while the simulated tumor was simultaneously tracked with an EMT system using Calypso. The geometric accuracy was validated by comparing the motion trajectories derived from Calypso and 4D-CBCT with the ground truth from motion control software. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional dynamic doses were measured with the Matrixx and ArcCHECK installed on a motion platform, both with and without EMT. For tumor motion with 5, 7.5 mm amplitudes, the average absolute differences of sample position between Calypso and the ground truth were 0.286±0.234 mm, 0.407±0.331 mm respectively. Dosimetric accuracy was validated with 3 mm/3% gamma criterion. The average gamma pass rates of 2D dynamic dose validation based on Matrixx were less than 46% without EMT, 97.3% using 2 mm gating limit, 96% using 3 mm gating limit and 93.4% using 5mm gating limit respectively. The mean 3D dynamic dose validation pass rates based on ArcCHECK were 65.9% without EMT, 96.2% using 3 mm gating limit, and 92.5% using 5 mm gating limit with EMT respectively. The geometric accuracy of the Calypso system in tracking the moving target area was stable at the submillimeter level. The dosimetric accuracy could be improved significantly with EMT using an appropriate gating limit. Radiotherapy accuracy electromagnetic tracking Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Hua Zhang verfasserin aut Yaoqin Xie verfasserin aut Lin Zhu verfasserin aut Bailin Zhang verfasserin aut Chunya Cai verfasserin aut Fei Li verfasserin aut Geng Yang verfasserin aut Huaizhi Jin verfasserin aut Xuetao Wang verfasserin aut In IEEE Access IEEE, 2014 7(2019), Seite 127693-127702 (DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5 21693536 nnns volume:7 year:2019 pages:127693-127702 https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 kostenfrei https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8794804/ kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 7 2019 127693-127702
allfieldsGer	10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 doi (DE-627)DOAJ057683778 (DE-599)DOAJ8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng TK1-9971 Zhenhui Dai verfasserin aut Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edge accelerator while the simulated tumor was simultaneously tracked with an EMT system using Calypso. The geometric accuracy was validated by comparing the motion trajectories derived from Calypso and 4D-CBCT with the ground truth from motion control software. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional dynamic doses were measured with the Matrixx and ArcCHECK installed on a motion platform, both with and without EMT. For tumor motion with 5, 7.5 mm amplitudes, the average absolute differences of sample position between Calypso and the ground truth were 0.286±0.234 mm, 0.407±0.331 mm respectively. Dosimetric accuracy was validated with 3 mm/3% gamma criterion. The average gamma pass rates of 2D dynamic dose validation based on Matrixx were less than 46% without EMT, 97.3% using 2 mm gating limit, 96% using 3 mm gating limit and 93.4% using 5mm gating limit respectively. The mean 3D dynamic dose validation pass rates based on ArcCHECK were 65.9% without EMT, 96.2% using 3 mm gating limit, and 92.5% using 5 mm gating limit with EMT respectively. The geometric accuracy of the Calypso system in tracking the moving target area was stable at the submillimeter level. The dosimetric accuracy could be improved significantly with EMT using an appropriate gating limit. Radiotherapy accuracy electromagnetic tracking Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Hua Zhang verfasserin aut Yaoqin Xie verfasserin aut Lin Zhu verfasserin aut Bailin Zhang verfasserin aut Chunya Cai verfasserin aut Fei Li verfasserin aut Geng Yang verfasserin aut Huaizhi Jin verfasserin aut Xuetao Wang verfasserin aut In IEEE Access IEEE, 2014 7(2019), Seite 127693-127702 (DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5 21693536 nnns volume:7 year:2019 pages:127693-127702 https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 kostenfrei https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8794804/ kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 7 2019 127693-127702
allfieldsSound	10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 doi (DE-627)DOAJ057683778 (DE-599)DOAJ8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng TK1-9971 Zhenhui Dai verfasserin aut Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study 2019 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edge accelerator while the simulated tumor was simultaneously tracked with an EMT system using Calypso. The geometric accuracy was validated by comparing the motion trajectories derived from Calypso and 4D-CBCT with the ground truth from motion control software. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional dynamic doses were measured with the Matrixx and ArcCHECK installed on a motion platform, both with and without EMT. For tumor motion with 5, 7.5 mm amplitudes, the average absolute differences of sample position between Calypso and the ground truth were 0.286±0.234 mm, 0.407±0.331 mm respectively. Dosimetric accuracy was validated with 3 mm/3% gamma criterion. The average gamma pass rates of 2D dynamic dose validation based on Matrixx were less than 46% without EMT, 97.3% using 2 mm gating limit, 96% using 3 mm gating limit and 93.4% using 5mm gating limit respectively. The mean 3D dynamic dose validation pass rates based on ArcCHECK were 65.9% without EMT, 96.2% using 3 mm gating limit, and 92.5% using 5 mm gating limit with EMT respectively. The geometric accuracy of the Calypso system in tracking the moving target area was stable at the submillimeter level. The dosimetric accuracy could be improved significantly with EMT using an appropriate gating limit. Radiotherapy accuracy electromagnetic tracking Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Hua Zhang verfasserin aut Yaoqin Xie verfasserin aut Lin Zhu verfasserin aut Bailin Zhang verfasserin aut Chunya Cai verfasserin aut Fei Li verfasserin aut Geng Yang verfasserin aut Huaizhi Jin verfasserin aut Xuetao Wang verfasserin aut In IEEE Access IEEE, 2014 7(2019), Seite 127693-127702 (DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5 21693536 nnns volume:7 year:2019 pages:127693-127702 https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 kostenfrei https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8794804/ kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 7 2019 127693-127702
language	English
source	In IEEE Access 7(2019), Seite 127693-127702 volume:7 year:2019 pages:127693-127702
sourceStr	In IEEE Access 7(2019), Seite 127693-127702 volume:7 year:2019 pages:127693-127702
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Radiotherapy accuracy electromagnetic tracking Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	IEEE Access
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Zhenhui Dai @@aut@@ Hua Zhang @@aut@@ Yaoqin Xie @@aut@@ Lin Zhu @@aut@@ Bailin Zhang @@aut@@ Chunya Cai @@aut@@ Fei Li @@aut@@ Geng Yang @@aut@@ Huaizhi Jin @@aut@@ Xuetao Wang @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2019-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	728440385
id	DOAJ057683778
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ057683778</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230501192241.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ057683778</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">TK1-9971</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhenhui Dai</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edge accelerator while the simulated tumor was simultaneously tracked with an EMT system using Calypso. The geometric accuracy was validated by comparing the motion trajectories derived from Calypso and 4D-CBCT with the ground truth from motion control software. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional dynamic doses were measured with the Matrixx and ArcCHECK installed on a motion platform, both with and without EMT. For tumor motion with 5, 7.5 mm amplitudes, the average absolute differences of sample position between Calypso and the ground truth were 0.286±0.234 mm, 0.407±0.331 mm respectively. Dosimetric accuracy was validated with 3 mm/3% gamma criterion. The average gamma pass rates of 2D dynamic dose validation based on Matrixx were less than 46% without EMT, 97.3% using 2 mm gating limit, 96% using 3 mm gating limit and 93.4% using 5mm gating limit respectively. The mean 3D dynamic dose validation pass rates based on ArcCHECK were 65.9% without EMT, 96.2% using 3 mm gating limit, and 92.5% using 5 mm gating limit with EMT respectively. The geometric accuracy of the Calypso system in tracking the moving target area was stable at the submillimeter level. The dosimetric accuracy could be improved significantly with EMT using an appropriate gating limit.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Radiotherapy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">accuracy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">electromagnetic tracking</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hua Zhang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yaoqin Xie</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lin Zhu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bailin Zhang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chunya Cai</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fei Li</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Geng Yang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Huaizhi Jin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xuetao Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">IEEE Access</subfield><subfield code="d">IEEE, 2014</subfield><subfield code="g">7(2019), Seite 127693-127702</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)728440385</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2687964-5</subfield><subfield code="x">21693536</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:7</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:127693-127702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8794804/</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">7</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="h">127693-127702</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	T - Technology
author	Zhenhui Dai
spellingShingle	Zhenhui Dai misc TK1-9971 misc Radiotherapy misc accuracy misc electromagnetic tracking misc Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study
authorStr	Zhenhui Dai
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)728440385
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	TK1-9971
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	21693536
topic_title	TK1-9971 Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study Radiotherapy accuracy electromagnetic tracking
topic	misc TK1-9971 misc Radiotherapy misc accuracy misc electromagnetic tracking misc Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering
topic_unstemmed	misc TK1-9971 misc Radiotherapy misc accuracy misc electromagnetic tracking misc Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering
topic_browse	misc TK1-9971 misc Radiotherapy misc accuracy misc electromagnetic tracking misc Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	IEEE Access
hierarchy_parent_id	728440385
hierarchy_top_title	IEEE Access
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)728440385 (DE-600)2687964-5
title	Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ057683778 (DE-599)DOAJ8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0
title_full	Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study
author_sort	Zhenhui Dai
journal	IEEE Access
journalStr	IEEE Access
callnumber-first-code	T
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2019
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	127693
author_browse	Zhenhui Dai Hua Zhang Yaoqin Xie Lin Zhu Bailin Zhang Chunya Cai Fei Li Geng Yang Huaizhi Jin Xuetao Wang
container_volume	7
class	TK1-9971
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Zhenhui Dai
doi_str_mv	10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	validation of geometric and dosimetric accuracy of edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking: a phantom study
callnumber	TK1-9971
title_auth	Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study
abstract	This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edge accelerator while the simulated tumor was simultaneously tracked with an EMT system using Calypso. The geometric accuracy was validated by comparing the motion trajectories derived from Calypso and 4D-CBCT with the ground truth from motion control software. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional dynamic doses were measured with the Matrixx and ArcCHECK installed on a motion platform, both with and without EMT. For tumor motion with 5, 7.5 mm amplitudes, the average absolute differences of sample position between Calypso and the ground truth were 0.286±0.234 mm, 0.407±0.331 mm respectively. Dosimetric accuracy was validated with 3 mm/3% gamma criterion. The average gamma pass rates of 2D dynamic dose validation based on Matrixx were less than 46% without EMT, 97.3% using 2 mm gating limit, 96% using 3 mm gating limit and 93.4% using 5mm gating limit respectively. The mean 3D dynamic dose validation pass rates based on ArcCHECK were 65.9% without EMT, 96.2% using 3 mm gating limit, and 92.5% using 5 mm gating limit with EMT respectively. The geometric accuracy of the Calypso system in tracking the moving target area was stable at the submillimeter level. The dosimetric accuracy could be improved significantly with EMT using an appropriate gating limit.
abstractGer	This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edge accelerator while the simulated tumor was simultaneously tracked with an EMT system using Calypso. The geometric accuracy was validated by comparing the motion trajectories derived from Calypso and 4D-CBCT with the ground truth from motion control software. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional dynamic doses were measured with the Matrixx and ArcCHECK installed on a motion platform, both with and without EMT. For tumor motion with 5, 7.5 mm amplitudes, the average absolute differences of sample position between Calypso and the ground truth were 0.286±0.234 mm, 0.407±0.331 mm respectively. Dosimetric accuracy was validated with 3 mm/3% gamma criterion. The average gamma pass rates of 2D dynamic dose validation based on Matrixx were less than 46% without EMT, 97.3% using 2 mm gating limit, 96% using 3 mm gating limit and 93.4% using 5mm gating limit respectively. The mean 3D dynamic dose validation pass rates based on ArcCHECK were 65.9% without EMT, 96.2% using 3 mm gating limit, and 92.5% using 5 mm gating limit with EMT respectively. The geometric accuracy of the Calypso system in tracking the moving target area was stable at the submillimeter level. The dosimetric accuracy could be improved significantly with EMT using an appropriate gating limit.
abstract_unstemmed	This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edge accelerator while the simulated tumor was simultaneously tracked with an EMT system using Calypso. The geometric accuracy was validated by comparing the motion trajectories derived from Calypso and 4D-CBCT with the ground truth from motion control software. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional dynamic doses were measured with the Matrixx and ArcCHECK installed on a motion platform, both with and without EMT. For tumor motion with 5, 7.5 mm amplitudes, the average absolute differences of sample position between Calypso and the ground truth were 0.286±0.234 mm, 0.407±0.331 mm respectively. Dosimetric accuracy was validated with 3 mm/3% gamma criterion. The average gamma pass rates of 2D dynamic dose validation based on Matrixx were less than 46% without EMT, 97.3% using 2 mm gating limit, 96% using 3 mm gating limit and 93.4% using 5mm gating limit respectively. The mean 3D dynamic dose validation pass rates based on ArcCHECK were 65.9% without EMT, 96.2% using 3 mm gating limit, and 92.5% using 5 mm gating limit with EMT respectively. The geometric accuracy of the Calypso system in tracking the moving target area was stable at the submillimeter level. The dosimetric accuracy could be improved significantly with EMT using an appropriate gating limit.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
title_short	Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study
url	https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858 https://doaj.org/article/8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0 https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8794804/ https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536
remote_bool	true
author2	Hua Zhang Yaoqin Xie Lin Zhu Bailin Zhang Chunya Cai Fei Li Geng Yang Huaizhi Jin Xuetao Wang
author2Str	Hua Zhang Yaoqin Xie Lin Zhu Bailin Zhang Chunya Cai Fei Li Geng Yang Huaizhi Jin Xuetao Wang
ppnlink	728440385
callnumber-subject	TK - Electrical and Nuclear Engineering
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858
callnumber-a	TK1-9971
up_date	2024-07-03T13:29:29.235Z
_version_	1803564738663153664
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ057683778</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230501192241.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2019 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ057683778</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">TK1-9971</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Zhenhui Dai</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2019</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This work was to devise a comprehensive testing scheme to evaluate the geometric and dosimetric accuracy of the Edge accelerator gating with electromagnetic tracking (EMT) for its safety in clinical application. A CIRS thorax phantom was scanned with four-dimensional cone-beam CT (4D-CBCT) on an Edge accelerator while the simulated tumor was simultaneously tracked with an EMT system using Calypso. The geometric accuracy was validated by comparing the motion trajectories derived from Calypso and 4D-CBCT with the ground truth from motion control software. The two-dimensional and three-dimensional dynamic doses were measured with the Matrixx and ArcCHECK installed on a motion platform, both with and without EMT. For tumor motion with 5, 7.5 mm amplitudes, the average absolute differences of sample position between Calypso and the ground truth were 0.286±0.234 mm, 0.407±0.331 mm respectively. Dosimetric accuracy was validated with 3 mm/3% gamma criterion. The average gamma pass rates of 2D dynamic dose validation based on Matrixx were less than 46% without EMT, 97.3% using 2 mm gating limit, 96% using 3 mm gating limit and 93.4% using 5mm gating limit respectively. The mean 3D dynamic dose validation pass rates based on ArcCHECK were 65.9% without EMT, 96.2% using 3 mm gating limit, and 92.5% using 5 mm gating limit with EMT respectively. The geometric accuracy of the Calypso system in tracking the moving target area was stable at the submillimeter level. The dosimetric accuracy could be improved significantly with EMT using an appropriate gating limit.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Radiotherapy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">accuracy</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">electromagnetic tracking</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Electrical engineering. Electronics. Nuclear engineering</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hua Zhang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Yaoqin Xie</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Lin Zhu</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Bailin Zhang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Chunya Cai</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Fei Li</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Geng Yang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Huaizhi Jin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Xuetao Wang</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">IEEE Access</subfield><subfield code="d">IEEE, 2014</subfield><subfield code="g">7(2019), Seite 127693-127702</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)728440385</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2687964-5</subfield><subfield code="x">21693536</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:7</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2019</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:127693-127702</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2934858</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/8e465dae76ad4df28571a5adc83f09b0</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8794804/</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2169-3536</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">7</subfield><subfield code="j">2019</subfield><subfield code="h">127693-127702</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.401025

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Validation of Geometric and Dosimetric Accuracy of Edge Accelerator Gating With Electromagnetic Tracking: A Phantom Study

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?