A collision prediction framework for noncoplanar radiotherapy planning and delivery. Issue 8 (19th June 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Islam, Naveed; Kilian‐Meneghin, Josh; deBoer, Steven; Podgorsak, Matthew
• Is Part Of: Journal of applied clinical medical physics. Volume 21:Issue 8(2020)
• Page Start: 92
• Page End: 106
• Publication Date: 2020-06-19
• Subjects: collision prediction -- noncoplanar radiation therapy -- patient safety -- treatment planning; Medical physics -- Periodicals; Clinical medicine -- Periodicals; Health Physics; Clinical Medicine; Electronic journals; Periodicals; Periodicals; Fulltext; Internet Resources; 610.153
• DOI: 10.1002/acm2.12920
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1526-9914

Abstract

Abstract: Purpose: Noncoplanar radiotherapy can provide significant dosimetric benefits. However, clinical implementation of such techniques is not fully realized, partially due to the absence of a collision prediction tool integrated into the clinical workflow. In this work, the feasibility of developing a collision prediction system (CPS) suitable for integration into clinical practice has been investigated. Methods: The CPS is based on a geometric model of the Linear Accelerator (Linac), and patient morphology acquired at the simulator using a combination of the planning CT scan and 3‐D vision camera (Microsoft, Kinect) data. Physical dimensions of Linac components were taken to construct a geometric model. The Linac components include the treatment couch, gantry, and imaging devices. The treatment couch coordinates were determined based on a correspondence among the CT couch top, Linac couch, and the treatment isocenter location. A collision is predicted based on dot products between vectors denoting points in Linac components and patient morphology. Collision test cases were simulated with the CPS and experimentally verified using ArcCheck and Rando phantoms to simulate a patient. Results: For 111 collision test cases, the sensitivity and specificity of the CPS model were calculated to be 0.95 and 1.00, respectively. The CPS predicted collision states that left conservative margins, as designed, relative to actual collision locations. The average difference between the predicted and measured collision states was 2.3 cm for lateral couch movements. The predicted couch rotational position for a collision between the gantry and a patient analog differed from actual values on average by 3.8°. The magnitude of these differences is sufficient to account for interfractional patient positioning variations during treatment. Conclusion: The feasibility of developing a CPS using geometric models and standard vector algebra has been investigated. This study outlines a framework for potential clinical implementation of a CPS for noncoplanar radiotherapy.