Entropy Generation in MHD Mixed Convection Non-Newtonian Second-Grade Nanoliquid Thin Film Flow through a Porous Medium with Chemical Reaction and Stratification.

Chemical reaction in mixed convection magnetohydrodynamic second grade nanoliquid thin film flow through a porous medium containing nanoparticles and gyrotactic microorganisms is considered with entropy generation. The stratification phenomena, heat and mass transfer simultaneously take place within system. Microorganisms are utilized to stabilize the suspended nanoparticles through bioconvection. For the chemical reaction of species, the mass transfer increases. The governing equations of the problem are transformed to nonlinear differential equations through similarity variables, which are solved through a well known scheme called homotopy analysis method. The solution is expressed through graphs and illustrations which show the influences of all the parameters. The residual error graphs elucidate the authentication of the present work.

Analysis of the setup errors and residual errors for ExacTrac X-ray image-guidance system for radiotherapy of somal tumors / 中华放射医学与防护杂志

Objective To retrospectively analyze the setup error in radiotherapy of somal tumors and body metastases using the ExacTrac X-ray portal image,and to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of 6D setup error correction in body radiotherapy.Methods The translational and rotational setup errors were calculated by registering the bony structures on the ExacTrac X-setup images to that of the digitally reconstructed setup images,and the corresponding residual errors were calculated together.Results The translational and rotational setup errors in the x (left-right),y (superior-inferior),z (anterior-posterior) and Rx (sagittal),Ry (transverse),Rz (coronal) directions were(2.27±2.02) mm,(4.49±2.52) mm,(2.27± 1.37) mm and (1.02 ± 0.73) °,(0.67 ± 0.68) °,(0.76 ± 0.84) °,respectively.The residual translational and rotational setup errors in the x(r),y(r),z(r) and Rx(r),Ry(r),Rz(r) directions were(0.27±0.48)mm,(0.37±0.45)mm,(0.22±0.30)mm and (0.17±0.33)°,(0.14±0.34)°,(0.16± 0.28) ° respectively.Conclusions Besides the translational setup errors,a certain amount of rotational setup errors exist in radiotherapy of somal tumors and body metastases.By using the 6D setup error correction of the ExacTrac system,a translational less than 0.4 mm and rotational setup errors less than 0.2° could be achieved.

Analysis of translational errors in frame-based and frameless cranial radiosurgery using an anthropomorphic phantom.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate three-dimensional translational setup errors and residual errors in image-guided radiosurgery, comparing frameless and frame-based techniques, using an anthropomorphic phantom. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We initially used specific phantoms for the calibration and quality control of the image-guided system. For the hidden target test, we used an Alderson Radiation Therapy (ART)-210 anthropomorphic head phantom, into which we inserted four 5mm metal balls to simulate target treatment volumes. Computed tomography images were the taken with the head phantom properly positioned for frameless and frame-based radiosurgery. RESULTS: For the frameless technique, the mean error magnitude was 0.22 ± 0.04 mm for setup errors and 0.14 ± 0.02 mm for residual errors, the combined uncertainty being 0.28 mm and 0.16 mm, respectively. For the frame-based technique, the mean error magnitude was 0.73 ± 0.14 mm for setup errors and 0.31 ± 0.04 mm for residual errors, the combined uncertainty being 1.15 mm and 0.63 mm, respectively. CONCLUSION: The mean values, standard deviations, and combined uncertainties showed no evidence of a significant differences between the two techniques when the head phantom ART-210 was used.

OBJETIVO: Comparar os erros de posicionamento e erros residuais translacionais tridimensionais de uma radiocirurgia guiada por imagem, frame versus frameless, com uso de um objeto simulador antropomórfico. MATERIAIS E MÉTODOS: Para a calibração e qualidade do sistema de imagem foram utilizados objetos simuladores específicos. Para o teste hidden target foi utilizado o crânio do objeto simulador antropomórfico Alderson Radiation Therapy (ART)-210, dentro do qual foram inseridas quatro esferas metálicas de 5 mm de diâmetro como volumes alvos de tratamento. Imagens tomográficas foram realizadas com o ART-210 devidamente posicionado para ambos os métodos de imobilização. RESULTADOS: Para o método frameless, a média foi 0,22 ± 0,04 mm para os erros setup e 0,14 ± 0,02 mm para os erros residuais, apresentando uma incerteza combinada de 0,28 mm e 0,16 mm, respectivamente. Para o método frame, a média foi 0,73 ± 0,14 mm para os erros setup e 0,31 ± 0,04 mm para os erros residuais, apresentando uma incerteza combinada de 1,15 mm e 0,63 mm, respectivamente. CONCLUSÃO: Com base nas médias, desvios-padrão e incertezas combinadas, os resultados mostraram não haver evidências de diferença significativa entre as técnicas em questão quando utilizado um objeto simulador antropomórfico craniano ART-210.

Analysis of translational errors in frame-based and frameless cranial radiosurgery using an anthropomorphic phantom / Análise dos erros de posicionamento translacionais em radiocirurgia craniana frame e frameless com uso de objeto simulador antropomórfico

Abstract Objective: To evaluate three-dimensional translational setup errors and residual errors in image-guided radiosurgery, comparing frameless and frame-based techniques, using an anthropomorphic phantom. Materials and Methods: We initially used specific phantoms for the calibration and quality control of the image-guided system. For the hidden target test, we used an Alderson Radiation Therapy (ART)-210 anthropomorphic head phantom, into which we inserted four 5mm metal balls to simulate target treatment volumes. Computed tomography images were the taken with the head phantom properly positioned for frameless and frame-based radiosurgery. Results: For the frameless technique, the mean error magnitude was 0.22 ± 0.04 mm for setup errors and 0.14 ± 0.02 mm for residual errors, the combined uncertainty being 0.28 mm and 0.16 mm, respectively. For the frame-based technique, the mean error magnitude was 0.73 ± 0.14 mm for setup errors and 0.31 ± 0.04 mm for residual errors, the combined uncertainty being 1.15 mm and 0.63 mm, respectively. Conclusion: The mean values, standard deviations, and combined uncertainties showed no evidence of a significant differences between the two techniques when the head phantom ART-210 was used.

Resumo Objetivo: Comparar os erros de posicionamento e erros residuais translacionais tridimensionais de uma radiocirurgia guiada por imagem, frame versus frameless, com uso de um objeto simulador antropomórfico. Materiais e Métodos: Para a calibração e qualidade do sistema de imagem foram utilizados objetos simuladores específicos. Para o teste hidden target foi utilizado o crânio do objeto simulador antropomórfico Alderson Radiation Therapy (ART)-210, dentro do qual foram inseridas quatro esferas metálicas de 5 mm de diâmetro como volumes alvos de tratamento. Imagens tomográficas foram realizadas com o ART-210 devidamente posicionado para ambos os métodos de imobilização. Resultados: Para o método frameless, a média foi 0,22 ± 0,04 mm para os erros setup e 0,14 ± 0,02 mm para os erros residuais, apresentando uma incerteza combinada de 0,28 mm e 0,16 mm, respectivamente. Para o método frame, a média foi 0,73 ± 0,14 mm para os erros setup e 0,31 ± 0,04 mm para os erros residuais, apresentando uma incerteza combinada de 1,15 mm e 0,63 mm, respectivamente. Conclusão: Com base nas médias, desvios-padrão e incertezas combinadas, os resultados mostraram não haver evidências de diferença significativa entre as técnicas em questão quando utilizado um objeto simulador antropomórfico craniano ART-210.