Evaluation of Elekta Agility multi‐leaf collimator performance using statistical process control tools

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the performance and stability of Elekta Agility multi‐leaf collimator (MLC) leaf positioning using a daily, automated quality control (QC) test based on megavoltage (MV) images in combination with statistical process control tools, and identify special causes of variations in performance. Methods Leaf positions were collected daily for 13 Elekta linear accelerators over 11‐37 months using the automated QC test, which analyzes 23 MV images to determine the location of MLC leaves relative to radiation isocenter. Leaf positioning stability was assessed using individual and moving range control charts. Specification levels of ±0.5, ±1, and ±1.5 mm were tested to determine positional accuracy. The durations between out‐of‐control and out‐of‐specification events were determined. Peaks in out‐of‐control leaf positions were identified and correlated to servicing events recorded for the whole duration of data collection. Results Mean leaf position error was −0.01 mm (range −1.3–1.6). Data stayed within ±1 mm specification for 457 days on average (range 3–838) and within ±1.5 mm for the entire date range. Measurements stayed within ±0.5 mm for 1 day on average (range 0–17); however, our MLC leaves were not calibrated to this level of accuracy. Leaf position varied little over time, as confirmed by tight individual (mean ±0.19 mm, range 0.09–0.43) and moving range (mean 0.23 mm, range 0.10–0.53) control limits. Due to sporadic out‐of‐control events, the mean in‐control duration was 2.8 days (range 1–28.5). A number of factors were found to contribute to leaf position errors and out‐of‐control behavior, including servicing events, beam spot motion, and image artifacts. Conclusions The Elekta Agility MLC model was found to perform with high stability, as evidenced by the tight control limits. The in‐specification durations support the current recommendation of monthly MLC QC tests with a ±1 mm tolerance. Future work is on‐going to determine if performance can be optimized further using high‐frequency QC test results to drive recalibration frequency.

8+ Year Performance of the Gamma Knife Perfexion/Icon Patient Positioning System and Possibilities for Preemptive Fault Detection Using Statistical Process Control

“…One such set of techniques is statistical process control (SPC) techniques, which are commonly used to detect changes in the performance of manufacturing processes and have been applied successfully in several process-intensive medical settings. 8 For radiotherapy, SPC has been used to monitor linear accelerator beam steering, 9 couch motion, 10 electron-beam monitoring, 11 multileaf collimator performance, 12 fiducial registration error, 13 and patient-specific QA, 14 among other applications. SPC has been recently been incorporated into some commercial machine QA tools.…”

Automated contouring and statistical process control for plan quality in a breast clinical trial

“…This technique has long been used for monitoring the quality of a process in the manufacturing industry. In radiotherapy specifically, SPC has been used for QA, e.g., monitoring linac beam quality and machine performance [10] , [11] , [12] , [13] , [14] , [15] and verifying intensity-modulated radiation therapy plans [16] , [17] , [18] , [19] . More recently, SPC was used for monitoring the performance of an automated planning tool, the Radiation Planning Assistant [20] .…”

Guía para el control de calidad y seguridad en aceleradores lineales de uso clínico

“…50,51 • Evaluación del comportamiento de un MLC mediante CEP. 61 • Control estadístico de procesos en la verificación dosimétrica de la IMRT. 21,46 • Monitorización de los cambios anatómicos de pacientes usando CEP.…”