All Title Author
Keywords Abstract

Publish in OALib Journal
ISSN: 2333-9721
APC: Only $99


The Influence of the Minimum Dynamic Leaf Gap on VMAT Plans Quality

DOI: 10.4236/oalib.1107378, PP. 1-12

Subject Areas: Radiology

Keywords: COMPASS, Leaf Gap, VMAT

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib


The aim of the present work is to investigate the influence of dynamic minimum leaf gap into Pinnacle3 on VMAT plans quality. Three treatment machines were modeled in our TPS with a different value of dynamic minimum leaf gap of 5, 10 and 20 mm. VMAT plans of AAPM TG-119 phantom and twenty clinical real cases were planned on each machine. Based on AAPM TG-119 guidelines, we compared the machine on their ability to fulfill the dose goals; the pretreatment quality assurance was done with COMPASS QA system (IBA dosimetry, Germany). In order to evaluate how the measured and the planned data from each machine are closed. The monitor units’ numbers for each site and machine were also compared. For simple plans, all the three machines easily meet the goals; however, for complex shape case, only the 5 and 10 mm minimum leaf gap machines allow the user to reach the goals. Otherwise, the 20 mm minimum leaf gap machine presents lower difference between planned and measured dose and the best gamma scores than the two others machines. It also has the lower MUs per clinical site. Based on this investigation, 10 mm is the best compromise value for the dynamic minimum leaf gap into Pinnacle. It allows the planner to reach high complex goals during planning process and in another hand gives good agreement between planned and measured doses.

Cite this paper

Zamo, C. F. D. , Moyo, M. N. , Colliaux, A. and Blot-Lafond, V. (2021). The Influence of the Minimum Dynamic Leaf Gap on VMAT Plans Quality. Open Access Library Journal, 8, e7378. doi:


[1]  Yu, C.X. (1995) Intensity-Modulated Arc Therapy with Dynamic Multileaf Collimation: An Alternative to Tomotherapy. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 40, 1435.
[2]  LoSasso, T., Chui, C.S. and Ling, C.C. (2001) Comprehensive Quality Assurance for the Delivery of Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy with a Multileaf Collimator Used in the Dynamic Mode. Medical Physics, 28, 2209-2219.
[3]  Stakchall, G., Steadham, R.E., Popple, R.A., Ahmad, S. and Rosen, I.I. (2000) Beam Commissioning Methodology for a Three-Dimensional Convolution/Superposition Photon Dose Algorithm. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 1, 8-27.
[4]  Cosgrove, V.P., Thomas, M.D.R., Weston, S.J., et al. (2009) Physical Characterization of a New Design of an Elekta Radiation Head with Integrated 160-Leaf Multileaf Collimator. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 75, S722-S723.
[5]  Bedford, J.L., Childs, P.J., Nordmark Hansen, V., Mosleh-Shirazi, M.A., Verhaegen, F. and Warrington, A.P. (2003) Commissioning and Quality Assurance of the Pinnacle Radiotherapy Treatment Planning System for External Beam Photons. The British Journal of Radiology, 76, 163-76.
[6]  Bedford, J.L., Thomas, M.D.R. and Smyth, G. (2013) Beam Modeling and VMAT Performance with the Agility 160-Leaf Multileaf Collimator. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics, 14, 172-185.
[7]  Boggula, R., Lorenz, F., Mueller, L., et al. (2010) Experimental Validation of a Commercial 3D Dose Verification System for Intensity-Modulated Arc Therapies. Physics in Medicine & Biology, 55, 5619-5633.
[8]  Ezzell, G.A., Galvin, J.M., Low, D., et al. (2003) Guidance Document on Delivery, Treatment Planning, and Clinical Implementation of IMRT: Report of the IMRT Subcommittee of the AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee. Medical Physics, 30, 2089-2115.


comments powered by Disqus

Contact Us


WhatsApp +8615387084133

WeChat 1538708413