Original paper| Volume 45, P25-34, January 2018

Download started.


An assessment of a 3D EPID-based dosimetry system using conventional two- and three-dimensional detectors for VMAT


      • Validation of EPID pre-treatment & transit dose using 2D and 3D detectors.
      • Direct comparison between EPID pre-treatment, transit, 2D/3D detectors.
      • Validation indicates achievable gamma index under ideal conditions.
      • In-house gamma methodology ensures consistency for 2D and 3D modalities.



      To provide a 3D dosimetric evaluation of a commercial portal dosimetry system using 2D/3D detectors under ideal conditions using VMAT.


      A 2D ion chamber array, radiochromic film and gel dosimeter were utilised to provide a dosimetric evaluation of transit phantom and pre-treatment ‘fluence’ EPID back-projected dose distributions for a standard VMAT plan. In-house 2D and 3D gamma methods compared pass statistics relative to each dosimeter and TPS dose distributions.


      Fluence mode and transit EPID dose distributions back-projected onto phantom geometry produced 2D gamma pass rates in excess of 97% relative to other tested detectors and exported TPS dose planes when a 3%, 3 mm global gamma criterion was applied. Use of a gel dosimeter within a glass vial allowed comparison of measured 3D dose distributions versus EPID 3D dose and TPS calculated distributions. 3D gamma comparisons between modalities at 3%, 3 mm gave pass rates in excess of 92%. Use of fluence mode was indicative of transit results under ideal conditions with slightly reduced dose definition.


      3D EPID back projected dose distributions were validated against detectors in both 2D and 3D. Cross validation of transit dose delivered to a patient is limited due to reasons of practicality and the tests presented are recommended as a guideline for 3D EPID dosimetry commissioning; allowing direct comparison between detector, TPS, fluence and transit modes. The results indicate achievable gamma scores for a complex VMAT plan in a homogenous phantom geometry and contributes to growing experience of 3D EPID dosimetry.


      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'


      Subscribe to Physica Medica: European Journal of Medical Physics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect


        • Mijnheer B.
        • Olaciregui-Ruiz I.
        • Rozendaal R.
        • et al.
        3D EPID-based in vivo dosimetry for IMRT and VMAT.
        J Phys Conf Ser. 2013; 444: 012011
        • van Elmpt W.
        • McDermott L.
        • Nijsten S.
        • et al.
        A literature review of electronic portal imaging for radiotherapy dosimetry.
        Radiother Oncol. 2008; 88: 289-309
        • McDermott L.
        • Nijsten S.
        • Sonke J.
        • et al.
        Comparison of ghosting effects for three commercial a-Si EPIDs.
        Med Phys. 2006; 33: 2448-2451
        • Antonuk L.
        Electronic portal imaging devices: a review and historical perspective of contemporary technologies and research.
        Phys Med Biol. 2002; 47: R31-R65
        • Antonuk L.
        • Yorkston J.
        • Huang W.
        • et al.
        A real-time, flatpanel, amorphous silicon, digital X-ray imager.
        Radiographics. 1995; 15: 993-1000
        • Greer P.B.
        • Popescu C.C.
        Dosimetric properties of an amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device for verification of dynamic intensity modulated radiation therapy.
        Med Phys. 2003; 30: 1618-1627
        • Van Esch A.
        • Depuydt T.
        • Huyskens D.P.
        The use of an aSi-based EPID for routine absolute dosimetric pre-treatment verification of dynamic IMRT fields.
        Radiother Oncol. 2004; 71: 223-234
        • Nijsten S.M.
        • Minken A.W.
        • Lambin P.
        • Bruinvis I.A.
        Verification of treatment parameter transfer by means of electronic portal dosimetry.
        Med Phys. 2004; 31: 341-347
        • Renner W.D.
        • Sarfaraz M.
        • Earl M.A.
        • Yu C.X.
        A dose delivery verification method for conventional and intensity-modulated radiation therapy using measured field fluence distributions.
        Med Phys. 2003; 30: 2996-3005
        • Renner W.D.
        3D dose reconstruction to ensure correct external beam treatment of patients.
        Med Dosim. 2007; 32: 157-165
        • Wendling M.
        • McDermott L.N.
        • Mans A.
        • et al.
        A simple backprojection algorithm for 3D in vivo EPID dosimetry of IMRT treatments.
        Med Phys. 2009; 36: 3310-3321
        • Renner W.D.
        • Norton K.
        • Holmes T.
        A method for deconvolution of integrated electronic portal images to obtain incident fluence for dose reconstruction.
        J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2005; 6: 22-39
        • Mijnheer B.
        • Mans A.
        • Olaciregui-Ruiz I.
        • et al.
        3D EPID-based in vivo dosimetry: a major step forward towards optimal quality and safety in radiation oncology practice.
        Med Phys. 2014; 41: 457
        • Mijnheer B.
        • Olaciregui-Ruiz I.
        • Rozendaal R.
        • et al.
        Current status of 3D EPID-based in vivo dosimetry in The Netherlands Cancer Institute.
        J Phys Conf Ser. 2015; 573: 012014
        • Bäck A.
        Quasi 3D dosimetry (EPID, conventional 2D/3D detector matrices).
        J Phys: Conf Ser. 2015; 573
        • Ricketts K.
        • Navarro C.
        • Lane K.
        • et al.
        Implementation and evaluation of a transit dosimetry system for treatment verification.
        Phys Med. 2016; 32: 671-680
        • Wu C.
        • Hosier K.E.
        • Beck K.E.
        • et al.
        On using 3D γ-analysis for IMRT and VMAT pretreatment plan QA.
        Med Phys. 2012; 39: 3051-3059
        • Narayanasamy G.
        • Zalman T.
        • Ha C.S.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of Dosimetry Check software for IMRT patient-specific quality assurance.
        J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2015; 16: 5427
        • Xing A.
        • Deshpande S.
        • Arumugam S.
        • et al.
        Is a quasi-3D dosimeter better than a 2D dosimeter for Tomotherapy delivery quality assurance?.
        J Phys Conf Ser. 2015; 573: 012077
        • Kim J.
        • Choi C.H.
        • Wu H.G.
        • et al.
        Correlation analysis between 2D and quasi-3D gamma evaluations for both intensity-modulated radiation therapy and volumetric modulated arc therapy.
        Oncotarget. 2017; 8: 5449-5459
        • Gimeno J.
        • et al.
        Commissioning and initial experience with a commercial software for in vivo volumetric dosimetry.
        Physica Med. 2014; 30: 954-959
      1. Alber M, Broggi S, De Wagter C et al. Guidelines for the verification of IMRT. ESTRO Booklet no. 9. 1st ed. Brussels, Belgium, ESTRO; 2008.

        • Warkentin
        • et al.
        Dosimetric IMRT verification with a flat-panel EPID.
        Med Phys. 2003; 30: 3143-3155
        • Casanova Borca V.
        • Pasquino M.
        • Russo G.
        • et al.
        Dosimetric characterization and use of GAFCHROMIC EBT3 film for IMRT dose verification.
        J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2013; 14
        • Boggula R.
        • Birkner M.
        • Lohr F.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of a 2D detector array for patient-specific VMAT QA with different setups.
        Phys Med Biol. 2011; 56: 7163-7177
        • Wolfsberger L.D.
        • Wagar M.
        • Nitsch P.
        • et al.
        Angular dose dependence of Matrixx TM and its calibration.
        J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2010; 11: 3057
        • Niroomand-Rad A.
        • Blackwell C.R.
        • Coursey B.M.
        • et al.
        Radiochromic film dosimetry: recommendations of AAPM radiation therapy committee task group 55.
        Med Phys. 1998; 25: 2093-2115
        • Micke A.
        • Lewis D.F.
        • Yu X.
        Multichannel film dosimetry with non-uniformity correction.
        Med Phys. 2011; 38: 2523-2534
        • Van Hoof S.J.
        • Granton P.V.
        • Landry G.
        • et al.
        Evaluation of a novel triple-channel radiochromic film analysis procedure using EBT2.
        Phys Med Biol. 2012; 57: 4353-4368
        • Vávrů K.
        • Dvořák P.
        • Tintěra J.
        • Spěváček V.
        Influence of preparation and calibration method of PAGAT dosimeter on TSE MR readout results.
        J Phys Conf Ser. 2013; 444: 012093
        • De Deene Y.
        • De Wagter C.
        • Van Duyse B.
        Validation of MR-based polymer gel dosimetry as a preclinical three-dimensional verification tool in conformal radiotherapy.
        J Magn Reson Imaging. 2000; 43: 116-125
        • Hussein M.
        • Clark C.H.
        • Nisbet A.
        Challenges in calculation of the gamma index in radiotherapy – Towards good practice.
        Physica Med. 2017; 36: 1-11
        • Low D.A.
        • Harms W.B.
        • Mutic S.
        • Purdy J.A.
        A technique for the quantitative evaluation of dose distributions.
        Med Phys. 1998; 25
        • Pulliam K.B.
        • Huang J.Y.
        • Howell R.M.
        • et al.
        Comparison of 2D and 3D gamma analyses.
        Med Phys. 2014; 41: 021710
        • Lafratta R.
        • Ibbott G.
        • Adamovics J.
        • Followill D.
        Comparison of 2D and 3D Gamma calculations for an IMRT QA phantom.
        J Phys: Conf Ser. 2015; 573 (012055)
        • MacDougall N.D.
        • Graveling M.
        • Hansen V.N.
        • Brownsword K.
        • Morgan A.
        In vivo dosimetry in UK external beam radiotherapy: current and future usage.
        Br J Radiol. 2017; 90: 20160915