The response of the 2D detector array, MP512, has been evaluated. The properties of the array demonstrated suitability for use as in phantom dosimeter for QA in SRS and SBRT. Although MP512 matches film measurements down to 1×1 cm2 well, it showed a discrepancy of 4% in the determination of output factors of beams smaller than 0.5×0.5 cm2 due to the field perturbation generated by the large amount of silicon surrounding the central diode. MP512 is highly capable of measuring beam size (FWHM) and has a discrepancy of less than 1.3% when compared to EBT3 film. A reduction in the detector pitch to less than 2 mm would improve the penumbra reconstruction accuracy at the cost readout electronics complexity.
The purpose of this study is to compare performance of several dosimetric methods in heterogeneous phantoms irradiated by 6 and 18 MV beams. Monte Carlo (MC) calculations were used, along with two versions of Acuros XB, anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA), EBT2 film, and MOSkin dosimeters. Percent depth doses (PDD) were calculated and measured in three heterogeneous phantoms. The first two phantoms were a 30×30×30 cm3 solid‐water slab that had an air‐gap of 20×2.5×2.35 cm3. The third phantom consisted of 30×30×5 cm3 solid water slabs, two 30×30×5 cm3 slabs of lung, and one 30×30×1 cm3 solid water slab. Acuros XB, AAA, and MC calculations were within 1% in the regions with particle equilibrium. At media interfaces and buildup regions, differences between Acuros XB and MC were in the range of +4.4% to −12.8%. MOSkin and EBT2 measurements agreed to MC calculations within ∼2.5%, except for the first centimeter of buildup where differences of 4.5% were observed. AAA did not predict the backscatter dose from the high‐density heterogeneity. For the third, multilayer lung phantom, 6 MV beam PDDs calculated by all TPS algorithms were within 2% of MC. 18 MV PDDs calculated by two versions of Acuros XB and AAA differed from MC by up to 2.8%, 3.2%, and 6.8%, respectively. MOSkin and EBT2 each differed from MC by up to 2.9% and 2.5% for the 6 MV, and by −3.1% and ∼2% for the 18 MV beams. All dosimetric techniques, except AAA, agreed within 3% in the regions with particle equilibrium. Differences between the dosimetric techniques were larger for the 18 MV than the 6 MV beam. MOSkin and EBT2 measurements were in a better agreement with MC than Acuros XB calculations at the interfaces, and they were in a better agreement to each other than to MC. The latter is due to their thinner detection layers compared to MC voxel sizes.PACS numbers: 87.55.K‐, 87.55.kd, 87.55.km, 87.53.Bn, 87.55.k
PurposeThe aim of this work was to evaluate the use of an angularly independent silicon detector (edgeless diodes) developed for dosimetry in megavoltage radiotherapy for Cyberknife in a phantom and for patient quality assurance (QA).MethodThe characterization of the edgeless diodes has been performed on Cyberknife with fixed and IRIS collimators. The edgeless diode probes were tested in terms of basic QA parameters such as measurements of tissue‐phantom ratio (TPR), output factor and off‐axis ratio. The measurements were performed in both water and water‐equivalent phantoms. In addition, three patient‐specific plans have been delivered to a lung phantom with and without motion and dose measurements have been performed to verify the ability of the diodes to work as patient‐specific QA devices. The data obtained by the edgeless diodes have been compared to PTW 60016, SN edge, PinPoint ionization chamber, Gafchromic EBT3 film, and treatment planning system (TPS).ResultsThe TPR measurement performed by the edgeless diodes show agreement within 2.2% with data obtained with PTW 60016 diode for all the field sizes. Output factor agrees within 2.6% with that measured by SN EDGE diodes corrected for their field size dependence. The beam profiles’ measurements of edgeless diodes match SN EDGE diodes with a measured full width half maximum (FWHM) within 2.3% and penumbra widths within 0.148 mm. Patient‐specific QA measurements demonstrate an agreement within 4.72% in comparison with TPS.ConclusionThe edgeless diodes have been proved to be an excellent candidate for machine and patient QA for Cyberknife reproducing commercial dosimetry device measurements without need of angular dependence corrections. However, further investigation is required to evaluate the effect of their dose rate dependence on complex brain cancer dose verification.
Contemporary radiation therapy (RT) is complicated and requires sophisticated real-time quality assurance (QA). While 3D real-time dosimetry is most preferable in RT, it is currently not fully realised. A small, easy to use and inexpensive point dosimeter with real-time and in vivo capabilities is an option for routine QA. Such a dosimeter is essential for skin, in vivo or interface dosimetry in phantoms for treatment plan verification. The metal-oxide-semiconductor-field-effect-transistor (MOSFET) detector is one of the best choices for these purposes, however, the MOSFETs sensitivity and its signal stability degrade after essential irradiation which limits its lifespan. The accumulation of positive charge on the gate oxide and the creation of interface traps near the silicon-silicon dioxide layer is the primary physical phenomena responsible for this degradation. The aim of this study is to investigate MOSFET dosimeter recovery using two proposed annealing techniques: direct current (DC) and pulsed current (PC), both based on hot charged carrier injection into the gate oxide of the p-MOSFET dosimeter. The investigated MOSFETs were reused multiple times using an irradiation-annealing cycle. The effect of the current-annealing parameters was investigated for the dosimetric characteristics of the recovered MOSFET dosimeters such as linearity, sensitivity and initial threshold voltage. Both annealing techniques demonstrated excellent results in terms of maintaining a stable response, linearity and sensitivity of the MOSFET dosimeter. However, PC annealing is more preferable than DC annealing as it offers better dose response linearity of the reused MOSFET and has a very short annealing time.
The purpose of this study was to examine the accuracy of AcurosXB and AAA algorithms near low and high density heterogeneities of different densities using EBT2 film, MOSFET detector "MOSkin" and Monte Carlo calculations using BEAMnrc/DOSXYZnrc. Three different interfaces were used that included a solid water phantom with 2×2×30cm rectangular air gap, rectangular steel insert, and a slab of water embedded between two slabs of lung material. 6MV photon beam with field size of 10×10cm was used for the first two geometries and a 3×3cm -field was used for the third. Percentage Depth Doses were measured and calculated at the beam central axis. Calculation voxel of 0.1×0.1×0.1cm was used by all three algorithms. For all configurations, AcurosXB and AAA agreed to within ±1.3% with MC before the inhomogeneity. The PDD measurements using MOSkin and EBT2 in water, apart from 0.2cm layer near heterogeneity, agreed with the MC within ±2.2%. Within 0.1cm before the water-air interface AcurosXB and AAA overestimated the dose by 4.7% and 1.6%, respectively. Whereas, in the 0.1cm beyond the air-water interface, AcurosXB and AAA overestimated the dose by 2.4% and 16.2% respectively. In the 0.1cm before the water-steel interface, AcurosXB overestimated the dose by 4.7% and AAA underestimated the dose by 9.5%; beyond the steel-water interface AcurosXB and AAA overestimated the dose by 3.6% and 7.7% respectively. For the lung phantom configuration, AcurosXB and AAA were in agreement with MC within 2% throughout the phantom. These results demonstrate improved performance of AcurosXB as compared to AAA in considered conditions.
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.