2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.brachy.2010.02.038
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of Measured and Calculated Exit Dose for Intracavitary Accelerated Partial Breast Irradiation with an Electronic Brachytherapy Source

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

2
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This simple model was similar to TG-43 but took into account the absence of backscatter from air outside the patient (which contributes to the overestimation of skin dose when using TG-43) (Ref. 27) and low-density lung tissue inside the patient. This would be used to isolate the effect of tissue heterogeneity in regions where nonpatient backscatter (or absence of) would be an important factor in dose differences when comparing to TG-43.…”
Section: F Water-air Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This simple model was similar to TG-43 but took into account the absence of backscatter from air outside the patient (which contributes to the overestimation of skin dose when using TG-43) (Ref. 27) and low-density lung tissue inside the patient. This would be used to isolate the effect of tissue heterogeneity in regions where nonpatient backscatter (or absence of) would be an important factor in dose differences when comparing to TG-43.…”
Section: F Water-air Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The estimated uncertainties for the experimental setups are in the Tables III-V, for the TLD, EBT3, and A1SL dosimetric systems, respectively. The uncertainties specific to each method were propagated and analyzed using the methodology of DeWerd et al 57 Table III shows the estimated uncertainties for the TLD measurement results, following an equivalent method adopted by Raffi et al 7,13 The linearity corrections realized by the 60 Co source were estimated to be 1.0% considering the fitting uncertainties and absorbed dose determination. The phantom scattering reflects on the uncertainties involved in the scattering conditions and is estimated to be 0.5%.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of these materials in the context of the radiotherapy was previously explored in the literature. [12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] Table I lists the material combination and thickness used in each setup. These combinations were selected in order to simulate patient anatomy, such as interfaces of breast-tobone and lung-to-bone-breast, conditions of scattering and backscattering using heterogeneous materials, and effects of boundary of high or low densities compared with water simulator materials.…”
Section: A Phantom Design and Heterogeneity Materialsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations