An MLC calibration method using a detector array

Authors

  • Simon Thomas A.,

    1. Department of Nuclear and Radiological Engineering, University of Florida, 202 Nuclear Science Building, Gainesville, Florida 32611-8300; Sun Nuclear Corporation, 425-A Pineda Court, Melbourne, Florida 32940; and Department of Radiation Oncology, Health Science Center, University of Florida, P.O. Box 100385, Gainesville, Florida 32610-0385
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Kahler Darren,

    1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Health Science Center, University of Florida, P.O. Box 100385, Gainesville, Florida 32610-0385
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Simon William E.,

    1. Sun Nuclear Corporation, 425-A Pineda Court, Melbourne, Florida 32940
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Fox Christopher,

    1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Tulane University, 1415 Tulane Ave, HC65, New Orleans, Louisiana 70112
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Li Jonathan,

    1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Health Science Center, University of Florida, P.O. Box 100385, Gainesville, Florida 32610-0385
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Palta Jatinder,

    1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Health Science Center, University of Florida, P.O. Box 100385, Gainesville, Florida 32610-0385
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Liu Chihray

    1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Health Science Center, University of Florida, P.O. Box 100385, Gainesville, Florida 32610-0385
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

Purpose:

The authors have developed a quantitative calibration method for a multileaf collimator (MLC) which measures individual leaf positions relative to the MLC backup jaw on an Elekta Synergy linear accelerator.

Methods:

The method utilizes a commercially available two-axis detector array (Profiler 2; Sun Nuclear Corporation, Melbourne, FL). To calibrate the MLC bank, its backup jaw is positioned at the central axis and the opposing jaw is retracted to create a half-beam configuration. The position of the backup jaws field edge is then measured with the array to obtain what is termed the radiation defined reference line. The positions of the individual leaf ends relative to this reference line are then inferred by the detector response in the leaf end penumbra. Iteratively adjusting and remeasuring the leaf end positions to within specifications completes the calibration. Using the backup jaw as a reference for the leaf end positions is based on three assumptions: (1) The leading edge of an MLC leaf bank is parallel to its backup jaw's leading edge, (2) the backup jaw position is reproducible, and (3) the measured radiation field edge created by each leaf end is representative of that leaf's position. Data from an electronic portal imaging device (EPID) were used in a similar analysis to check the results obtained with the array.

Results:

The relative leaf end positions measured with the array differed from those measured with the EPID by an average of 0.11 ±0.09 mm per leaf. The maximum leaf positional change measured with the Profiler 2 over a 3 month period was 0.51 mm. A leaf positional accuracy of ±0.4 mm is easily attainable through the iterative calibration process. The method requires an average of 40 min to measure both leaf banks.

Conclusions:

This work demonstrates that the Profiler 2 is an effective tool for efficient and quantitative MLC quality assurance and calibration.

Ancillary