Monaco Static MLC Sequencer Technical Reference (2.0)
Monaco Static MLC Sequencer Technical Reference (2.0)
Copyright 2014
All Rights Reserved
IMPAC Medical Systems, Inc.
Copyright statement
© 2014 IMPAC Medical Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Do not make printed or electronic copies of this
document, or parts of it, without written authority from IMPAC Medical Systems, Inc.
The information contained in this document is for the sole use of IMPAC Medical Systems, Inc. personnel,
authorized users of the Equipment, and Licensees of IMPAC Medical Systems, Inc. and for no other purpose.
Referenced documents
Elekta does not supply all documents that we refer to in this document with the equipment. Elekta reserves the right
to make the decision on which of the documents it supplies with the equipment.
Contact information
GLOBAL ELEKTA SOFTWARE SUPPORT
13723 Riverport Drive, Suite 100 Sunnyvale, California Europe, Latin America, Africa and Middle East
Maryland Heights, MO 63043 100 Mathilda Place, Fifth Floor Contact Information
Sales Sunnyvale, CA 94086 Elekta, Inc.
Toll Free: +1 800 878 4276 Phone: +1 408 830 8000 Linac House
Fax: +1 314 993 0075 Fax: +1 408 830 8003 Fleming Way, Crawley, West Sussex RH10 9RR
Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Phone: +44 1293 544 422
Customer Support Fax: +44 1293 654 321
Phone: +1 800 878 4CMS (4276)
Email: [email protected]
Table of Contents
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................................. 7
Overview of the Algorithm ......................................................................................................................................... 8
1. Profile Filtering .................................................................................................................................................. 8
2. Definition of Jaw Frames ................................................................................................................................... 9
3. Profile Decomposition ..................................................................................................................................... 10
4. Profile Clustering ............................................................................................................................................. 10
5. Shape Extraction .............................................................................................................................................. 11
6. Segmentation .................................................................................................................................................. 13
7. Recursion of Segment Extraction ..................................................................................................................... 13
8. Recursion of Jaw Frame Processing ................................................................................................................. 13
9. Segment Refinement ....................................................................................................................................... 13
10. Segment Sorting ............................................................................................................................................. 16
11. Post-Processing of Open Leaf Gaps ................................................................................................................ 16
Handling of MLC types requiring special treatments, Input-Output filters ......................................................... 20
Table of Figures
Figure 1: Three fluence weight profiles. Left: original; Center: segmentated; Right: difference between
original and segmentated ................................................................................................................................. 7
Figure 2: Profile filtering operations performed as a pre-processing step......................................................... 8
Figure 3: Additional profile filtering operations performed as a pre-processing step. .................................... 9
Figure 4: Profile decomposition into peaks that require delivery in separate segments. ............................. 10
Figure 5: Clustering translates the previously smooth fluence profile into a piecewise constant one. ....... 11
Figure 6: Shape Extraction....................................................................................................................................... 12
Figure 7: Shape Extraction with various minimum MU per Segment ............................................................... 12
Figure 8: Translation of a field shape into deliverable segments. .................................................................... 13
Figure 9: Mechanisms of segment shape optimization – Minimum area difference – MU merge............... 14
Figure 10: Mechanisms of segment shape refinement – Shape merge. ........................................................... 14
Figure 11: Mechanisms of segment shape refinement – Edge swap................................................................. 15
Figure 12: Mechanisms of segment shape refinement – Edge fuse&split. ...................................................... 15
Figure 13: Mechanisms of segment shape refinement – Incremental Leaf Position Changes. ..................... 16
Figure 14: Option ParkLeafGaps for the Elekta BeamModulator MLC. Center: full fluence profile. Left: one
segment with the leaf gaps parked under the jaws (shaded areas). Right: same segment with gaps
parked along the crest of the fluence profile. .............................................................................................. 17
Figure 15: Schematic correspondence between the number of segments and plan quality for a variation
of the min MU per segment parameter. Typical features are: 1. The number of segments needs to
exceed a certain patient-dependent threshold to achieve a sufficient plan quality; 2. The number of
segments depends sensitively on the min MU per segment parameter. Plots of this type are known as
“Pareto fronts”: there is no treatment plan with an equivalent number of segments that has a higher
plan quality than the curve............................................................................................................................. 18
Figure 16: Schematic correspondence between the number of segments and plan quality for a variation
of the min area per segment parameter. The dependency is weaker as for minimum MU per
segment, but the behavior is similar. Notice that the critical value for the minimum area is highly
patient specific, especially when tight dose gradients need to be drawn precisely around high risk
organs. ................................................................................................................................................................ 19
Introduction
The Monaco Static MLC Sequencer (StatSeq) translates fluence weight profiles into deliverable, static
MLC field shapes. The translation aims to minimize the difference between the original fluence weight
profile and the resulting profile. It also maintains a number of constraints on the field shapes and all MLC
design constraints. Further, the process makes any effort to produce the minimum number of apertures
with shapes as regular as possible. This facilitates accurate dose computation and rapid delivery due to
minimized leaf travel.
You must notice the difference between a fluence distribution and a fluence weight profile, which is the
input to the sequencer. The former describes the number of photons passing through any given point of
the radiation field. The latter describes the aperture time, commonly expressed in terms of Monitor Units
(MU). The dose computation algorithms perform the translation from aperture time to fluence.
Therefore, it is intuitive to think of a fluence weight profile as a distribution of exposure times.
The StatSeq does not explicitly recognize the actual MLC type; all relevant constraints and parameters for
the sequencing action are provided implicitly in a MlcGeometry data container.
Figure 1: Three fluence weight profiles. Left: original; Center: segmentated; Right: difference between
original and segmentated
1. Profile Filtering
The fluence weight profile as obtained from the dose optimizer passes through a filter that removes
features of the profile that cannot be delivered with the given MLC. These features include:
• Fluence elements of very low weight.
• Fluence peaks that are narrower than the minimum leaf gap or segment width.
• Fluence depressions that are narrower than the minimum segment width.
• Fluence islands that are smaller than the minimum segment area.
Fill&Skim
Truncate
truncate
sequencer flag. singleFrameWidth, which overwrites the MLC constraint-derived jaw frame width, i.e., the
sequencer acts as if the jaw frame width can be wider than normally possible. This can reduce the
capability to perform fluence modulation at the field edges.
3. Profile Decomposition
Monaco then decomposes, or splits, the profile into a series of individual peaks. The split lines are put
along the fluence valleys, where leaves have to be placed to produce the gradients. This ensures that
ultimately segments are created in groups that have similar shapes. Since it is more difficult to post-
process the segment shapes to ensure “organic” shapes, the profile is segmented piece-by–piece. These
pieces are generated such as to have a regular shape. This process will also result in minimized leaf travel.
The decomposition uses a modified, anisotropic watershed algorithm that distinguishes between fluence
valleys in leaf travel direction (that require leaves being placed at the slopes on either side of the valley to
produce the gradient) and valleys perpendicular to the leaf travel direction (which require jaws be placed
or leaf pairs be closed).
Decomposition
Figure 4: Profile decomposition into peaks that require delivery in separate segments.
4. Profile Clustering
Each sub-profile initially has continuous fluence weight values, which are clustered into a small number of
discrete values in this step. The clustering operation transforms the continuous values of the smooth
profile into a small set of discrete values. Only the superposition of a few static MLC segments can deliver
these discrete values. This results in a stair-stepped fluence weight profile (see Figure 1 center). The
clustering algorithm establishes these discrete fluence steps to:
• Fulfill the minimum MU per segment parameter
• Minimize the deviation between the initial profile and the clustered profile.
Clustering
Figure 5: Clustering translates the previously smooth fluence profile into a piecewise constant one.
5. Shape Extraction
The clustered sub-profiles are processed by a shape extraction search. This algorithm latches onto the
discrete fluence values. It then decomposes the clustered profile into a set of field shapes, which are
basically constant profiles. The superposition of these field shapes with their appropriate MU weights
equals the stair-stepped input profile. At the end of this stage, the initial profile has been decomposed into
a set of stacked field shapes, which do not yet obey MLC delivery constraints. The difference between the
initial, filtered profile and the stacked shapes is a difference profile, which can have positive and negative
entries (see Figure 1 right). The modulus of each of these is normally smaller than 0.5 * minimum MU per
segment, i.e. the maximum translation error is half the MU per segment. Larger translation errors can
occur due to the initial filtering of the input fluence profile.
Up to this stage, the MLC design constraints have not been taken into account, i.e. there is no guarantee
that the field shapes are deliverable at all, or that a field shape can be delivered with a single MLC
segment.
Shape Extraction
5 Shapes
6. Segmentation
Each field shape is translated into a static MLC segment. If necessary, it will be translated into more than
one. The segments are subjected to the minimum area constraint and put into a repository. At this stage,
MLC constraints are finally considered.
leaf
9. Segment Refinement
At this stage, there is a repository of valid MLC segments and a final difference profile. Segment
refinement aims to alter the segment shapes and combine segments in order to reduce:
• The irregularity of their shapes
• Their number, or
Figure 13: Mechanisms of segment shape refinement – Incremental Leaf Position Changes.
Figure 14: Option ParkLeafGaps for the Elekta BeamModulator MLC. Center: full fluence profile. Left:
one segment with the leaf gaps parked under the jaws (shaded areas). Right: same segment with gaps
parked along the crest of the fluence profile.
Sequencing Parameters
Apart from MLC design constraints, the Static Sequencer accepts the following parameters:
• Minimum Number of MU per Segment: This parameter controls the coarseness of the
translation of the initial fluence profile into segments. The sequencer will generate a new field
shape only if the depth of the fluence weight modulation exceeds this parameter. So, if this
parameter is large, fewer segments with greater differences in shape will be produced. If it is small,
more segments with potentially smaller differences in shape (between consecutive segments) will
be produced (see Figures 6 and 7). This is the most potent parameter to control the number of
segments obtained from a given fluence weight profile.
Figure 15: Schematic correspondence between the number of segments and plan quality for a variation
of the min MU per segment parameter. Typical features are: 1. The number of segments needs to exceed
a certain patient-dependent threshold to achieve a sufficient plan quality; 2. The number of segments
depends sensitively on the min MU per segment parameter. Plots of this type are known as “Pareto
fronts”: there is no treatment plan with an equivalent number of segments that has a higher plan quality
than the curve.
• Minimum Area per Segment: This parameter guarantees that the area of each segment is greater
than this value in cm2. Apart from having an impact on dose computation, this also reduces the
number of segments by removing the smallest ones. It can be detrimental to the overall quality of
the dose distribution to set this parameter too large. The dependency between segment number
and this parameter is not as strong as with minimum MU per segment.
Figure 16: Schematic correspondence between the number of segments and plan quality for a
variation of the min area per segment parameter. The dependency is weaker as for minimum
MU per segment, but the behavior is similar. Notice that the critical value for the minimum area
is highly patient specific, especially when tight dose gradients need to be drawn precisely around
high risk organs.
• Maximum Number of Segments Per Plan: This parameter controls the total number of
segments, summed up over all beams. It therefore needs to be applied in an external loop over all
beams, which is located in the treatment plan (TP) object. This loop calls the sequencing multiple
times with increasing min MU per Segment parameters until the desired number of segments is
reached. The loop starts with the used provided parameter of min MU per Segment, and increases
it by 0.5 MU at every iteration.
• Minimum Segment Width: This parameter controls the minimum width of the segments, such
as the minimum separation of a leaf pair. You can lessen the effect of bad MLC calibration, leaf
positioning accuracy or dose computation model with this parameter. It does usually not
influence the number of segments. However, it may have a detrimental effect on overall plan
quality if you set it too large. Notice that the minimum leaf separation is also controlled by a MLC
design constraint.
• Minimum Overlap between Carriage Groups: If profile splitting becomes necessary, the carriage
groups need to have a minimum overlap of this parameter times the maximum carriage group
width (see below for more details). Defaults to 15%.
• Single Jaw Frame Width for Sequencing: Turns off the profile splitting for field widths up to this
parameter. Defaults to 0.
The only special requirement affecting exposed leaves is point 2 of the Elekta Agility MLC. The
requirement is that the effective minimum leaf gap prescription (i.e. leaf position projected to isocentre
plane) varies with off-axis position. The algorithm employed here is as follows:
1. The sequencer uses the overall minimum leaf gap as constraint for all leaves at all positions. This
parameter must be greater than 0, e.g. 0.1 mm. Therefore, leaf positions are created whose gap is
too narrow if it is in a central location of the field.
2. The required minimum leaf gap is computed by applying a parabolic formula.
3. The leaf positions are then opened up symmetrically around the centre of the leaf gap.
Special input/output filters are also provided. Internal segments always comply with all constraints. These
functions are currently provided for the following MLC types: