摘要目的:验证使用医科达“快速验收流程”（AGL）标准流程验收多台加速器的可行性。方法:通过PTW Beamscan三维水箱对3台加速器束流进行调试，使束流达到AGL标准。对达到AGL标准的3台加速器进行剂量验证。使用中国医学科学院肿瘤医院简单野测试例，比较MapCheck 3面剂量测量结果与同一加速器模型计算得到的面剂量。随机选取头颈、食管、乳腺、肺、直肠等部位肿瘤的10例临床患者影像，分别采用容积弧形调强放疗（VMAT）和调强放疗（IMRT）技术进行计划设计，比较ArcCheck测量剂量与同一加速器模型计算得到的计划剂量。使用单因素方差分析对二维剂量和三维剂量的验证通过率进行统计学分析。结果:3台加速器6 MV X射线在水下10 cm处的百分深度剂量（PDD 10）分别为67.45%、67.36%、67.47%，且3台加速器之间最大偏差为0.11%。6 MV 非均整模式（FFF）X射线的PDD 10分别为67.33%、67.20%、67.20%，且3台加速器之间最大偏差为0.13%。3台加速器X射线各能量30 cm×30 cm Profile主轴上所有要求的离散点剂量与标准数据偏差小于±1%。对MapCheck 3二维剂量矩阵验证结果进行绝对γ分析，在10%阈值2 mm/3%标准下，中国医学科学院肿瘤医院测试例平均通过率均在99%以上且差异无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。对ArcCheck验证结果进行绝对γ分析，在10%阈值条件下，2 mm/3%的通过率均在95%以上，3台加速器不同能量不同治疗技术的平均通过率最大差异分别为0.28%（6 MV，VMAT）、0.19%（6 MV FFF，VMAT）、0.56%（6 MV，IMRT）和0.05%（6 MV FFF，IMRT），差异无统计学意义（ P>0.05）。 结论:与传统的加速器验收流程相比，使用AGL标准流程验收加速器，每台加速器验收时间缩短4~6周，并保证了患者放疗计划可以在各加速器之间互换执行。

abstractsObjective:To verify the feasibility of using Elekta accelerated go live (AGL) standard process for the acceptance of multiple accelerators.Methods:The beams of three accelerators were adjusted by PTW Beamscan three-dimensional water tank to reach the AGL standard. Dose verification was performed for three accelerators that met AGL standards. A simple field test example from Cancer Hospital Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences was used to compare the MapCheck 3 surface dose measurement results with the surface dose calculated by the same accelerator model. Images of 10 patients including head and neck, esophagus, breast, lung and rectum were randomly selected. volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment techniques were used for planning design, and the measured dose of ArcCheck was compared with the planned dose calculated by the same accelerator model. One-way ANOVA was used to statistically analyze the passing rates of two-dimensional and three-dimensional dose verification.Results:The 6 MV X-ray percentage depth dose at 10 cm underwater (PDD 10) of three accelerators was 67.45%, 67.36%, 67.47%, and the maximum deviation between the three accelerators was 0.11%. The 6 MV flattenting filter free (FFF) mode X-ray PDD 10 was 67.33%, 67.20%, 67.20%, and the maximum deviation between the three accelerators was 0.13%. All required discrete point doses on each energy 30 cm×30 cm Profile spindle of the three accelerator X-rays deviated less than ±1% from the standard data. Absolute γ analysis was performed on the results of MapCheck 3 two-dimensional dose matrix validation. Under the 10% threshold of 2 mm/3% standard, the average passing rate of the test cases in Cancer Hospital Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences was above 99%, and the difference was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). Absolute γ analysis was performed on the ArcCheck verification results. Under the 10% threshold, the pass rate of 2 mm/3% was all above 95%, the maximum average passing rate of the three accelerators with different energy and different treatment techniques was 0.28% (6 MV, VMAT), 0.19%(6 MV FFF, VMAT), 0.56% (6 MV, IMRT) and 0.05% (6 MV FFF, IMRT), and the difference was not statistically significant ( P>0.05). Conclusion:Compared with traditional accelerator acceptance process, the acceptance time of each accelerator is shortened by 4-6 weeks by using the AGL standard process, and the radiotherapy plan of patients can be interchangeably executed among different accelerators.