Time filter

Source Type

Jornet N.,Servei de Radiofisica i Radioproteccio | Carrasco P.,Servei de Radiofisica i Radioproteccio | Beltran M.,Servei de Fisica | Calvo J.F.,Servei dOncologia Radioterapica | And 4 more authors.
Radiotherapy and Oncology | Year: 2014

Background and purpose We performed a multicentre intercomparison of IMRT optimisation and dose planning and IMRT pre-treatment verification methods and results. The aims were to check consistency between dose plans and to validate whether in-house pre-treatment verification results agreed with those of an external audit. Materials and methods Participating centres used two mock cases (prostate and head and neck) for the intercomparison and audit. Compliance to dosimetric goals and total number of MU per plan were collected. A simple quality index to compare the different plans was proposed. We compared gamma index pass rates using the centre's equipment and methodology to those of an external audit. Results While for the prostate case, all centres fulfilled the dosimetric goals and plan quality was homogeneous, that was not the case for the head and neck case. The number of MU did not correlate with the plan quality index. Pre-treatment verifications results of the external audit did not agree with those of the in-house measurements for two centres: being within tolerance for in-house measurements and unacceptable for the audit or the other way round. Conclusions Although all plans fulfilled dosimetric constraints, plan quality is highly dependent on the planner expertise. External audits are an excellent tool to detect errors in IMRT implementation and cannot be replaced by intercomparison using results obtained by centres. © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Bueno M.,Polytechnic University of Catalonia | Carrasco P.,Servei de Radiofisica i Radioproteccio | Jornet N.,Servei de Radiofisica i Radioproteccio | Munoz-Montplet C.,Institute Catala dOncologia Girona | Duch M.A.,Polytechnic University of Catalonia
Medical Physics | Year: 2014

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the suitability of several detectors for the determination of absorbed dose in bone. Methods: Three types of ultrathin LiF-based thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) - two LiF:Mg,Cu,P-based (MCP-Ns and TLD-2000F) and a7Li-enriched LiF:Mg,Ti-based (MTS-7s) - as well as EBT2 Gafchromic films were used to measure percentage depth-dose distributions (PDDs) in a water-equivalent phantom with a bone-equivalent heterogeneity for 6 and 18 MV and a set of field sizes ranging from 5 ×5 cm2 to 20×20 cm2. MCP-Ns, TLD-2000F, MTS-7s, and EBT2 have active layers of 50, 20, 50, and 30 μm, respectively. Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculations (PENELOPE code) were used as the reference and helped to understand the experimental results and to evaluate the potential perturbation of the fluence in bone caused by the presence of the detectors. The energy dependence and linearity of the TLDs' response was evaluated. Results: TLDs exhibited flat energy responses (within 2.5%) and linearity with dose (within 1.1%) within the range of interest for the selected beams. The results revealed that all considered detectors perturb the electron fluence with respect to the energy inside the bone-equivalent material. MCP-Ns and MTS-7s underestimated the absorbed dose in bone by 4%-5%. EBT2 exhibited comparable accuracy to MTS-7s and MCP-Ns. TLD-2000F was able to determine the dose within 2% accuracy. No dependence on the beam energy or field size was observed. The MC calculations showed that 50μm thick detector can provide reliable dose estimations in bone regardless of whether it is made of LiF, water or EBT's active layer material. Conclusions: TLD-2000F was found to be suitable for providing reliable absorbed dose measurements in the presence of bone for high-energy x-ray beams. © 2014 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Goma C.,Servei de Radiofisica i Radioproteccio | Goma C.,Massachusetts General Hospital | Ruiz A.,Servei de Radiofisica i Radioproteccio | Jornet N.,Servei de Radiofisica i Radioproteccio | And 5 more authors.
Medical Physics | Year: 2011

Purpose: In the present era of cone-beam CT scanners, the use of the standardized CTDI100 as a surrogate of the idealized CTDI is strongly discouraged and, consequently, so should be the use of the dose-length product (DLP) as an estimate of the total energy imparted to the patient. However, the DLP is still widely used as a reference quantity to normalize the effective dose for a given scan protocol mainly because the CTDI100 is an easy-to-measure quantity. The aim of this article is therefore to describe a method for radiation dose assessment in large cone-beam single axial scans, which leads to a straightforward estimation of the total energy imparted to the patient. The authors developed a method accessible to all medical physicists and easy to implement in clinical practice in an attempt to update the bridge between CT dosimetry and the estimation of the effective dose. Methods: The authors used commercially available material and a simple mathematical model. The method described herein is based on the dosimetry paradigm introduced by the AAPM Task Group 111. It consists of measuring the dose profiles at the center and the periphery of a long body phantom with a commercial solid-state detector. A weighted dose profile is then calculated from these measurements. To calculate the CT dosimetric quantities analytically, a Gaussian function was fitted to the dose profile data. Furthermore, the Gaussian model has the power to condense the z -axis information of the dose profile in two parameters: The single-scan central dose, f (0), and the width of the profile, σ. To check the energy dependence of the solid-state detector, the authors compared the dose profiles to measurements made with a small volume ion chamber. To validate the overall method, the authors compared the CTDI100 calculated analytically to the measurement made with a 100 mm pencil ion chamber. Results: For the central and weighted dose profiles, the authors found a good agreement between the measured dose profile data and the fitted Gaussian functions. The solid-state detector had no energy dependence-within the energy range of interest-and the analytical model succeeded in reproducing the absolute dose values obtained with the pencil ion chamber. For the case of large cone-beam single axial scans, the quantity that better characterizes the total energy imparted to the patient is the weighted dose profile integral (DPIw). The DPIw can be easily determined from the two parameters that define the Gaussian functions: f (0) and σ. The authors found that the DLP underestimated the total energy imparted to the patient by more than 20%. The authors also found that the calculated CT dosimetric quantities were higher than those displayed on the scanner console. Conclusions: The authors described and validated a method to assess radiation dose in large cone-beam single axial scans. This method offers a simple and more accurate estimation of the total energy imparted to the patient, thus offering the possibility to update the bridge between CT dosimetry and the estimation of the effective dose for cone-beam CT examinations in radiology, nuclear medicine, and radiation therapy. © 2011 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Carrasco P.,Servei de Radiofisica i Radioproteccio | Jornet N.,Servei de Radiofisica i Radioproteccio | Jordi O.,Servei de Radiofisica i Radioproteccio | Lizondo M.,Servei de Radiofisica i Radioproteccio | And 4 more authors.
Medical Physics | Year: 2015

Purpose: To evaluate the main characteristics of the Exradin W1 scintillator as a dosimeter and to estimate measurement uncertainties when used in radiotherapy.Methods:We studied the calibration procedure, energy and modality dependence, short-term repeatability, dose-response linearity, angular dependence, temperature dependence, time to reach thermal equilibrium, dose-rate dependence, water-equivalent depth of the effective measurement point, and long-term stability. An uncertainty budget was derived for relative and absolute dose measurements in photon and electron beams.Results: Exradin W1 showed a temperature dependence of -0.225% °C-1. The loss of sensitivity with accumulated dose decreased with use. The sensitivity of Exradin W1 was energy independent for high-energy photon and electron beams. All remaining dependencies of Exradin W1 were around or below 0.5%, leading to an uncertainty budget of about 1%. When a dual channel electrometer with automatic trigger was not used, timing effects became significant, increasing uncertainties by one order of magnitude.Conclusions: The Exradin W1 response is energy independent for high energy x-rays and electron beams, and only one calibration coefficient is needed. A temperature correction factor should be applied to keep uncertainties around 2% for absolute dose measurements and around 1% for relative measurements in high-energy photon and electron beams. The Exradin W1 scintillator is an excellent alternative to detectors such as diodes for relative dose measurements. © 2015 American Association of Physicists in Medicine.

Discover hidden collaborations