Failure modes and effects analysis for clinical implementation of online adaptive radiotherapy: A systematic review

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The accuracy of radiotherapy is limited by anatomical variations occurring over time scales ranging from sub-seconds to days. Online Adaptive Radiotherapy (OART) addresses this by enabling daily plan adaptation based on real-time imaging. While OART offers improved dose conformity, its dynamic, time-constrained workflow introduces novel failure modes that challenge traditional quality assurance protocols. PURPOSE: This study aims to synthesize the existing literature on Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA) for OART to systematically catalog risks and identify mitigation strategies. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted to identify studies applying FMEA to OART workflows. Eleven studies were included, covering MR-guided (ViewRay MRIdian, Elekta Unity), CBCT-guided (Varian Ethos), and MR-enhanced C-arm linac systems. To address heterogeneity in risk scoring methodologies (e.g., TG-100 10-point scales vs. 5-point rankings), extracted failure modes were harmonized into a standardized three-tier risk classification system (Class I: Low, Class II: Intermediate, Class III: High). RESULTS: A total of 300 unique failure modes were identified, with 49.6 percent classified as high-risk (Class III). Analysis revealed that the majority of high-risk failures were concentrated in the online treatment delivery phase, specifically within human-computer interactions and anatomical contouring steps. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the development of tailored, robust QA frameworks that prioritize human factors and process consistency to guide safe implementation in diverse clinical settings.