XHA600E型国产数字化加速器性能检测与对比评价

引言

某医院放疗中心安装了一台XHA600E型直线加速器（山东新华），该机器是在XHA600D加速器的基础上，从软硬件两方面重新整合设计，最新推出的全数字化加速器。为了解该设备的实际性能，本文从物理性能和工程技术两方面对该设备开展了系统性检测，并与功能相似的进口机型在关键参数方面进行对比，找出新型国产加速器与进口加速器之间的差距，以期更好地将该设备应用于临床治疗。

1 材料与方法

1.1 设备与材料

XHA600E型加速器，Unique加速器（Varian，美国），IBA Blue Phantom2型三维水箱，DOSE1剂量仪，IBA 0.6 cc 指形电离室，EBT免冲洗胶片，IBA 固体水模，Las Vegas 模体，水平仪和钢直尺，坐标纸等。

XHA600E型国产数字化加速器

性能检测与对比评价

马蕾杰1，宋迎新2，雷宏昌1，刘晗1，刘冰1，陈鹏1

1.郑州大学附属肿瘤医院河南省肿瘤医院放疗科，河南郑州 450008；

2.山东新华医疗器械股份有限公司，山东淄博 255086

[摘 要] 目的对XHA600E型数字化加速器的各项技术指标进行系统性测试，并与Unique加速器在关键参数方面进行对比，找出新型国产加速器与进口加速器之间的差距，以期更好地使用XHA600E加速器开展临床治疗。方法依据国家标准GB/T 19046《医用电子加速器验收试验和周期检验规程》，使用水平仪、坐标纸、三维水箱、免冲洗胶片和Las Vegas模体等工具分别对XHA600E型加速器的机械参数、射线参数、MLC相关参数和EPID性能等进行测试，再对Unique加速器的等中心精度、射线质、射野平坦度和对称性等关键参数进行检测，两台设备测试结果进行对比评价。结果 XHA600E型加速器的各项技术指标均在误差要求范围以内。两台设备在等中心精度、射线质、射野平坦度和对称性等关键参数方面的差别不大，Unique总体优于XHA600E。结论 XHA600E相较于其上一代600D机型，软硬件性能有了很大提升，缩小了与进口加速器之间的差距。但在三维影像验证和剂量验证功能方面，仍有很大提升的空间。

[关键词] 国产加速器；等中心精度；性能检测；对比评价

Performance Verification and Contrast Evaluation of XHA600E Digital Accelerator MA Leijie1, SONG Yingxin2, LEI Hongchang1, LIU Han1, LIU Bing1, CHEN Peng1

1.Department of Radiation Therapy, The Affiliated Tumor Hospital of Zhengzhou University, Henan Provincial Tumor Hospital,

Zhengzhou Henan 450008, China; 2.Shandong Xinhua Medical Devices Co., Ltd., Zibo Shandong 255086, China Abstract: Objective To find the gap between the new domestic accelerator and the import accelerator, and to better use XHA600E accelerator for clinical treatment, we performed a systematic test with the technical indicators of XHA600E digital accelerator and a comparative analysis between the Unique accelerator and XHA600E accelerator in the key parameters. Methods Firstly, the mechanical parameters, ray parameters, MLC parameters and EPID performance of the XHA600E accelerator were tested by using tools such as spirit level, coordinate paper, three-dimensional water tank, rinse-free film and Las Vegas phantom according to the national standard GB/T 19046 “medical electron accelerator acceptance test and periodic inspection procedures”. Then the key parameters include the accuracy of isocenter, ray quality, field flatness and symmetry of Unique accelerator were tested. Finally, two equipment test results were compared and evaluated. Results The technical indicators of XHA600E accelerator were all within the scope of error requirements. Two devices had little difference in the key parameters such as accuracy of isocenter, ray quality, field flatness and symmetry, and Unique overall was superior to XHA600E. Conclusion Compared with the previous generation of 600D model, XHA600E has greatly improved in hardware and software performance, which narrows the gap with the import accelerator. However, there is still a lot of room for improvement in 3D image verification and dose verification.

Key words: demestic accelerator; accuracy of isocenter; performance testing; comparative evaluation

[中图分类号]TH774 [文献标识码] B

doi：10.3969/j.issn.1674-1633.2018.06.023　[文章编号] 1674-1633(2018)06-0088-04

收稿日期：2017-07-21 修回日期：2017-08-02

基金项目：河南省科技攻关项目（162102310321）。

通讯作者：雷宏昌，主任技师，主要研究方向为放射物理。

通讯作者邮箱：leihongchang@