Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39153061

ABSTRACT

The aim of this work was to evaluate the conformity of intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), and verify the accuracy of the planning and delivery system used in this work based on the AAPM TG-119 protocol. The Eclipse 13.6 treatment planning system (TPS) was used to plan the TG-119 test suite, which included four test cases: MultiTarget, Prostate, Head/Neck, and C-Shape for IMRT and VMAT techniques with 6 MV and 10 MV acceleration voltages. The results were assessed and discussed in terms of the TG-119 protocol and the results of previous studies. In addition, point dose and planar dose measurements were done using a semiflex ion chamber and an electronic portal imaging device (EPID), respectively. The planned doses of all test cases met the criteria of the TG-119 protocol, except those for the spinal cord of the C-Shape hard case. There were no significant differences between the treatment planning doses and the doses given in the TG-119 report, with p-values ranging from 0.974 to 1 (p > 0.05). Doses to the target volumes were similar in the IMRT and VMAT plans, but the organs at risk (OARs) doses were different depending on the test case. The planning results showed that IMRT is more conformal than VMAT in certain cases. For the point dose measurements, the confidence limit (CLpoint) of 0.030 and 0.021 were better than the corresponding values of 0.045 and 0.047 given in the TG-119 report for high-dose and low-dose areas, respectively. Regarding the planar dose measurements, the CLplanar value of 0.38 obtained in this work was lower than that given in the TG-119 report (12.4). It is concluded that the dosimetry measurements performed in this study showed better confidence limits than those provided in the TG 119 report. IMRT remains more conformal in certain circumstances than the more progressive VMAT. When selecting the method of delivering a dose to the patient, several factors must be considered, including the radiotherapy technique, energy, treatment site, and tumour geometry.

2.
Radiat Environ Biophys ; 62(1): 83-96, 2023 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36520198

ABSTRACT

The present study is aimed at exploring different scanning parameters, detectors and their orientations for time-efficient and accurate commissioning of a 6 MV clinical linear accelerator (LINAC). Beam profiles and percentage depth dose (PDD) curves were measured with a PTW dosimetry diode, a PTW Semiflex and a PinPoint ion chamber in different orientations. To acquire beam data, equidistant (step size of 0.5 mm, 1 mm, 2 mm and 3 mm) and fanline (step size of 2-0.5 mm, 2-1 mm, 3-0.5 mm and 3-1 mm) scanning modes were employed and data measurement time was recorded. Scan time per measurement point was also varied (0.2 s, 0.5 s and 1.0 s) to investigate its effect on the accuracy and acquisition time of beam data. Accuracy of the measured data was analyzed on the basis of the variation between measured data and data modeled by a treatment planning system. Beam profiles (particularly in penumbra region) were found to be sensitive to variation in scanning resolution and showed an improved accuracy with decrease in step size, while PDD curves were affected negligibly. The accuracy of beam data obtained with the PTW dosimetry diode and the PinPoint ion chamber was higher than those obtained with the PTW Semiflex ion chamber for small fields (2 × 2 cm2 and 3 × 3 cm2). However, the response of the PTW diode and the PinPoint ion chamber was significantly indifferent in these fields. Furthermore, axial orientation of the PTW Semiflex ion chamber improved accuracy of profiles and PDDs as compared to radial orientation, while such a difference was not significant for the PinPoint ion chamber. It is concluded that a scan time of 0.2 s/point with a fanline scanning resolution of 2-1 mm for beam profiles and 3 mm for PDDs are most favorable in terms of accuracy and time efficiency. For small fields (2 × 2 cm2 and 3 × 3 cm2), a PinPoint ion chamber in radial orientation or a dosimetry diode in axial orientation are recommended for both beam profiles and PDDs. If a PinPoint ion chamber and a PTW dosimetry diode are not available, a Semiflex ion chamber in axial orientation may be used for small fields.


Subject(s)
Particle Accelerators , Radiometry , Photons
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL