• Decrease font size
  • Return font size to normal
  • Increase font size
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

MAUDE Adverse Event Report: RAYSEARCH LABORATORIES AB (PUBL) RAYSTATION; RADIATION THERAPY TREATMENT PLANNING SYSTEM

  • Print
  • Share
  • E-mail
-
Super Search Devices@FDA
510(k) | DeNovo | Registration & Listing | Adverse Events | Recalls | PMA | HDE | Classification | Standards
CFR Title 21 | Radiation-Emitting Products | X-Ray Assembler | Medsun Reports | CLIA | TPLC
 

RAYSEARCH LABORATORIES AB (PUBL) RAYSTATION; RADIATION THERAPY TREATMENT PLANNING SYSTEM Back to Search Results
Model Number 5
Device Problems Application Program Problem: Dose Calculation Error (1189); Nonstandard Device (1420)
Patient Problem No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient (2692)
Event Type  No Answer Provided  
Event Description
For two patients, radiation therapy plans using proton pencil beam scanning were setup with a combination of parameters that caused the analytical proton pbs dose engine to yield significant errors in dose.The parameters were.Targets close to the patient surface, in combination with: beams/spots entering the patient surface at an oblique angle, and/or large lateral inhomogeneities within the patient.Using a range shifter, large air gap.As described in the raystation reference manual, the proton pbs dose engine treats any range shifter device as an extension of the patient and the pencil beam tracing will start at the entrance of the range shifter.This means the patient outline becomes a large lateral inhomogeneity when it is angled to the ray traces.When a range shifter is used in combination with a large air gap, the broadening of each pencil beam ray trace becomes significant when reaching the patient surface and the infinite slab approximation may be inaccurate.The effect is mainly hot spots and cold spots within the intended target, but hot spots outside the target could potentially occur.The error is more pronounced for shallow targets and increases with increasing air gap.The error also increases the more the beam to patient surface angle deviates from 90°.When comparing the planning dose to the dose obtained using an alternative dose engine based on the monte-carlo (mc) principle in a patient case, significant cold spots were found within the target.The plan had a shallow target at the chin/throat area and two beams partially at a pronounced angle to the patient surface with ~35 cm air gap.The dose error manifested itself as a general shift of the mc dvhs by -7%, with severe cold spots, and some hot spots in the ctv.For this case, the d95% dose level for the high dose ctv region decreased by 18%, the d98% by 25%, and the d2% increased by 4%, when comparing the mc dose to the plan dose.The -7% shift is expected due to the nuclear halo effect, as described in the raystation reference manual, and should be revealed and compensated for in the patient specific qa procedure.The effect of such dose scaling would be to increase the quoted d95% and d98% levels (i.E., for the better) and to increase the d2% dose (for the worse).The cold and hot spots are on the other hand not expected to be revealed in the qa procedure.For the moment, no consequences to the patients are known.The clinic may have organized a patient follow-up to detect any post-irradiation consequences.
 
Search Alerts/Recalls

  New Search  |  Submit an Adverse Event Report

Brand Name
RAYSTATION
Type of Device
RADIATION THERAPY TREATMENT PLANNING SYSTEM
Manufacturer (Section D)
RAYSEARCH LABORATORIES AB (PUBL)
sveavägen 44
stockholm, 11134
SW  11134
Manufacturer (Section G)
RAYSEARCH LABORATORIES AB (PUBL)
sveavägen 44
stockholm, 11134
SW   11134
Manufacturer Contact
david hedfors
box 3297
stockholm, 10365
SW   10365
8 5105300
MDR Report Key6141088
MDR Text Key61318072
Report Number3007774465-2016-00005
Device Sequence Number1
Product Code MUJ
Combination Product (y/n)N
Reporter Country CodeIT
PMA/PMN Number
K160093
Number of Events Reported1
Summary Report (Y/N)N
Report Source Manufacturer
Source Type health professional
Reporter Occupation Health Professional
Remedial Action Recall
Type of Report Initial
Report Date 12/02/2016
1 Device was Involved in the Event
1 Patient was Involved in the Event
Date FDA Received12/02/2016
Is this an Adverse Event Report? Yes
Is this a Product Problem Report? No
Device Operator Health Professional
Device Model Number5
Is the Reporter a Health Professional? Yes
Date Manufacturer Received10/28/2016
Was Device Evaluated by Manufacturer? Yes
Date Device Manufactured04/20/2016
Is the Device Single Use? No
Type of Device Usage Reuse
Patient Sequence Number1
Patient Outcome(s) Other;
-
-