As very small ion chambers become commercially available, medical physicists may be inclined to use them during the linear accelerator commissioning process to better characterize the beam in steep dose gradient areas. For this work, a total of eight different ion chambers (volumes from 0.007 cc to 0.6 cc) and four different scanning systems were used to scan PDDs at both +300normalV and −300normalV biases. We observed a reproducible, significant difference (overresponse with depth) in PDDs acquired when using very small ion chambers, with specific bias/water tank combinations — up to 5% at a depth of 25 cm in water. This difference was not observed when the PDDs were sampled using the ion chamber in static positions in conjunction with an external electrometer. This suggests noise/signal interference produced by the controller box and cable system assemblies, which can become relatively significant for the very small current signals collected by very small ion chambers, especially at depth as the signal level is even further reduced. Based on the results observed here, the use of very small active volume chambers under specific scanning conditions may lead to collection of erroneous data, introducing systematic errors into the treatment planning system. In case the use of such a chamber is required, we recommend determining whether such erroneous effect exists by comparing the scans with those obtained with a larger chamber.PACS numbers: 87.56.bd, 87.56.Fc, 87.56.Da
While the implementation of tools such as image‐guidance and immobilization devices have helped to prevent geometric misses in radiation therapy, many treatments remain prone to error if these items are not available, not utilized for every fraction, or are misused. The purpose of this project is to design a set of site‐specific treatment tolerance tables to be applied to the treatment couch for use in a record and verify (R&V) system that will insure accurate patient setup with minimal workflow interruption. This project also called for the construction of a simple indexing device to help insure reproducible patient setup for patients that could not be indexed with existing equipment. The tolerance tables were created by retrospective analysis on a total of 66 patients and 1,308 treatments, separating them into five categories based on disease site: lung, head and neck (H&N), breast, pelvis, and abdomen. Couch parameter tolerance tables were designed to encompass 95% of treatments, and were generated by calculating the standard deviation of couch vertical, longitudinal, and lateral values using the first day of treatment as a baseline. We also investigated an alternative method for generating the couch tolerances by updating the baseline values when patient position was verified with image guidance. This was done in order to adapt the tolerances to any gradual changes in patient setup that would not correspond with a mistreatment. The tolerance tables and customizable indexing device were then implemented for a trial period in order to determine the feasibility of the system. During this trial period we collected data from 1,054 fractions from 65 patients. We then analyzed the number of treatments that would have been out of tolerance, as well as whether or not the tolerances or setup techniques should be adjusted. When the couch baseline values were updated with every imaging fraction, the average rate of tolerance violations was 10% for the lung, H&N, abdomen, and pelvis treatments. Using the indexing device, tolerances for patients with pelvic disease decreased (e.g., from 5.3 cm to 4.3 cm longitudinally). Unfortunately, the results from breast patients were highly variable due to the complexity of the setup technique, making the couch an inadequate surrogate for measuring setup accuracy. In summary, we have developed a method to turn the treatment couch parameters within the R&V system into a useful alert tool, which can be implemented at other institutions, in order to identify potential errors in patient setup.PACS numbers: 87.53Kn, 87.55.kh, 87.55.ne, 87.55.km, 87.55K‐, 87.55.Qr
Purpose: As more so‐called micro ion chambers become commercially available, medical physicists may be inclined to use them during the linear accelerator commissioning process, in an attempt to better characterize the beam in steep dose gradient areas. The purpose of this work is to inform the medical physics community of a non‐trivial, anomalous behavior observed when very small chambers are used in certain beam scanning configurations. Methods: A total of six ion chambers (0.007cc to 0.6cc) were used to scan PDDs from a 10×10cm2 field at both +300V and −300V biases. PDDs were scanned using three different water tank scanning systems to determine whether different scanners exhibit the same abnormality. Finally, PDDs were sampled using an external electrometer to bypass the internal electrometer of the scanner to determine the potential contributions of the scanner electronics to the abnormality observed. Results: We observed a reproducible, significant difference (over‐response with depth) in PDDs acquired when using very small ion chambers with certain bias and watertank combinations, on the order of 3–5% at a depth of 25 cm in water. This difference was not observed when the PDDs were sampled using the ion chambers in conjunction with an external electrometer. This suggests a contribution of interference produced by the controller box and scanning system, which becomes significant for the very small signals collected by very small ion chambers, especially at depth, as the signal level is reduced even further. Conclusion: Based on the results observed here, if currently available very small ion chambers are used with specific bias and scanning water‐tank combinations, erroneous PDD data may be collected. If this data is used as input to the Treatment Planning System, systematic errors on the order of 3%–5% may be introduced into the treatment planning process.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.