The feasibility of using Microsoft Kinect v2 sensors during radiotherapy delivery
MetadataShow full item record
Consumer-grade distance sensors, such as the Microsoft Kinect devices (v1 and v2), have been investigated for use as marker-free motion monitoring systems for radiotherapy. The radiotherapy delivery environment is challenging for such sensors because of the proximity to electromagnetic interference (EMI) from the pulse forming network which fires the magnetron and electron gun of a linear accelerator (linac) during radiation delivery, as well as the requirement to operate them from the control area. This work investigated whether using Kinect v2 sensors as motion monitors was feasible during radiation delivery. Three sensors were used each with a 12 m USB 3.0 active cable which replaced the supplied 3 m USB 3.0 cable. Distance output data from the Kinect v2 sensors was recorded under four conditions of linac operation: (i) powered up only, (ii) pulse forming network operating with no radiation, (iii) pulse repetition frequency varied between 6 Hz and 400 Hz, (iv) dose rate varied between 50 and 1450 monitor units (MU) per minute. A solid water block was used as an object and imaged when static, moved in a set of steps from 0.6 m to 2.0 m from the sensor and moving dynamically in two sinusoidal-like trajectories. Few additional image artifacts were observed and there was no impact on the tracking of the motion patterns (root mean squared accuracy of 1.4 and 1.1 mm, respectively). The sensors’ distance accuracy varied by 2.0 to 3.8 mm (1.2 to 1.4 mm post distance calibration) across the range measured; the precision was 1 mm. There was minimal effect from the EMI on the distance calibration data: 0 mm or 1 mm reported distance change (2 mm maximum change at one position). Kinect v2 sensors operated with 12 m USB 3.0 active cables appear robust to the radiotherapy treatment environment.
Open access locationhttps://aapm.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1120/jacmp.v17i6.6377
Version of record
License start date
JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2016, 17 pp. 446 - 453