We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the clinical accuracy of an image‐guided frameless intracranial radiosurgery system. All links in the process chain were tested. Using healthy volunteers, we evaluated a novel method to prospectively quantify the range of target motion for optimal determination of the planning target volume (PTV) margin. The overall system isocentric accuracy was tested using a rigid anthropomorphic phantom containing a hidden target. Intrafraction motion was simulated in 5 healthy volunteers. Reinforced head‐and‐shoulders thermoplastic masks were used for immobilization. The subjects were placed in a treatment position for 15 minutes (the maximum expected time between repeated isocenter localizations) and the six‐degrees‐of‐freedom target displacements were recorded with high frequency by tracking infrared markers. The markers were placed on a customized piece of thermoplastic secured to the head independently of the immobilization mask. Additional data were collected with the subjects holding their breath, talking, and deliberately moving. As compared with fiducial matching, the automatic registration algorithm did not introduce clinically significant errors (<0.3 mm difference). The hidden target test confirmed overall system isocentric accuracy of ≤1 mm (total three‐dimensional displacement). The subjects exhibited various patterns and ranges of head motion during the mock treatment. The total displacement vector encompassing 95% of the positional points varied from 0.4 mm to 2.9 mm. Pre‐planning motion simulation with optical tracking was tested on volunteers and appears promising for determination of patient‐specific PTV margins. Further patient study is necessary and is planned. In the meantime, system accuracy is sufficient for confident clinical use with 3 mm PTV margins.PACS number: 87.53.Ly

No abstract

MAPCHECK analysis demonstrates high passing rates with the stringent γ(2%/2 mm) and local normalization criteria combination. The geometry of the ARCCHECK array creates a stress test for the FFF TPS model because of the shallow depth of the entrance diodes and large air cavity. Hence, the ARCCHECK γ-analysis passing rates are lower than with the MAPCHECK, while still on par with TG-119.

For an institution that already owns the licenses, it is economically advantageous and technically feasible to use Pinnacle TPS (Philips Radiation Oncology Systems, Fitchburg, WI) with the BrainLab Novalis delivery system (BrainLAB A.G., Heimstetten, Germany). This takes advantage of the improved accuracy of the convolution algorithm in the presence of heterogeneities compared with the pencil beam calculation, which is particularly significant for lung SBRT treatments. The reference patient positioning DRRs still have to be generated by the BrainLab software from the CT images and isocenter coordinates transferred from Pinnacle. We validated this process with the end‐to‐end hidden target test, which showed an isocenter positioning error within one standard deviation from the previously established mean value. The Novalis treatment table attenuation is substantial (up to 6.2% for a beam directed straight up and up to 8.4% for oblique incidence) and has to be accounted for in calculations. A simple single‐contour treatment table model was developed, resulting in mean differences between the measured and calculated attenuation factors of 0.0%–0.2%, depending on the field size. The maximum difference for a single incidence angle is 1.1%. The BrainLab micro‐MLC (mMLC) leaf tip, although not geometrically round, can be represented in Pinnacle by an arch with satisfactory dosimetric accuracy. Subsequently, step‐and‐shoot (direct machine parameter optimization) IMRT dosimetric agreement is excellent. VMAT (called “SmartArc” in Pinnacle) treatments with constant gantry speed and dose rate are feasible without any modifications to the accelerator. Due to the 3 mm‐wide mMLC leaves, the use of a 2 mm calculation grid is recommended. When dual arcs are used for the more complex cases, the overall dosimetric agreement for the SmartArc plans compares favorably with the previously reported results for other implementations of VMAT: γ(3%,3mm) for absolute dose obtained with the biplanar diode array passing rates above 97% with the mean of 98.6%. However, a larger than expected dose error with the single‐arc plans, confined predominantly to the isocenter region, requires further investigationPACS numbers: 87.55Qr, 87.56Nk

No abstract