Poster Poster Program Therapy Physics

Institutional Experience Commissioning Varian ARIA 18.1/18.2 In a Multi-Vendor Radiation Therapy Environment

Abstract
Purpose

We share our institutional experience upgrading Varian ARIA to v18.1/18. 2 in a multi-vendor radiation therapy environment, highlighting practical challenges, mitigations, and actionable lessons for centers planning similar upgrades.

Methods

A risk-based assessment identified failure modes across image transfer, plan transmission, treatment execution, and treatment data return. Interoperability testing evaluated DICOM RT/HL7 pathways across integrated imaging and delivery systems. Data-transfer QA verified DICOM RT objects, treatment parameters, imaging records, and fraction delivery documentation. Additional checks confirmed standardized nomenclature, plan integrity, and accurate execution of OIS-transmitted parameters on treatment machines. Operational readiness included: (1) ensuring adequate hardware/software resources and sufficient license pools to support parallel validation under timeline pressure; (2) defining end-user testing strategy in test versus pre-production environments; (3) early coordination with third-party vendors to confirm compatibility of interfaced software/hardware; (4) assigning named physics points-of-contact with divided task ownership, escalation pathways, and accountability tracking; and (5) recurring vendor–IT–clinic meetings for issue triage and closure. Lessons learned from a peer center that previously completed the upgrade were incorporated into the commissioning checklist.

Results

ARIA 18.1/18.2 supported stable workflows with correct transfer and interpretation of images, plans, and treatment records across evaluated systems. Key challenges included site-specific interface/mapping adjustments for non-native components, constrained throughput during peak testing due to license/resource limits, and “unknown unknowns” not fully covered by vendor pre-testing, requiring iterative regression cycles. Vendor experts/trainers at go-live accelerated issue resolution and supported user adoption. Connectivity between ARIA and our proton therapy system is planned but not yet clinically validated, as the proton program is not yet in clinical operation.

Conclusion

Commissioning ARIA in multi-vendor environments requires both technical verification and operational governance. Centers should plan not only commissioning but also post–go-live surveillance, with clear escalation paths and vendor-backed response expectations to detect latent issues and maintain clinical reliability.

People

Related

Similar sessions

Poster Poster Program
Jul 19 · 07:00
Python-Based Automation Framework for Annual Machine QA Data Archiving In Qatrack+

Annual water-tank measurements help ensure beam characteristics remain consistent with commissioning baselines. However, the lack of a standardized processing workflow and decentralized data storage makes it difficult to analyze...

Syed Bilal Ahmad, PhD
Therapy Physics 0 people interested
Poster Poster Program
Jul 19 · 07:00
User Expectations and Current Availability of HDR Brachytherapy Audits In Europe

The aim of this work was to evaluate the need to implement more dosimetric audits in high‐dose‐rate brachytherapy (HDR-BT) in Europe and to identify which characteristics such audits should meet according to users.

Javier Vijande, PhD Laura Oliver Cañamás
Therapy Physics 0 people interested