Dosimetric characteristics of the novel 2D ionization chamber array OCTAVIUS Detector 1500

Abstract

The OD1500 array's dosimetric properties showed the applicability of the array for clinical dosimetry with the possibility to increase the spatial sampling frequency and the coverage of a dose distribution with the sensitive areas of ionization chambers by merging two measurements.

Transit and non‐transit 3D EPID dosimetry versus detector arrays for patient specific QA

“…This volume effect of the Octavius 1500 array has already been reported in the literature 34. 3a displays the difference in isocenter dose values between the measurement configurations and the reference measurements performed with the microDiamond detector.…”

“…No saturation effects were observed with non-transit EPID dosimetry. 34 The average difference with Octavius isocenter dose values was −0.1 ± 0.5(1 SD) and −0.1 ± 0.4(1 SD) for transit and non-transit EPID dosimetry, respectively. The agreement between cross plane profiles through the isocenter was excellent, as exhibited in Fig.…”

Erratum: “Performance Parameters of a Liquid Filled Ionization Chamber Array” [Med. Phys. 40, 082106 (2013)]

“…As the pulse repetition frequency (prf) for the used ELEKTA Synergy linear accelerator is not directly accessible by the user it was determined from service documents with the help of a service engineer to be 400 Hz. During measurements for other studies we noticed inconsistencies with other detectors using this prf value. With the aid of ELEKTA the prf at 15 MV was measured with an oscilloscope to be 200 Hz and the measurement investigating the collection efficiency of the 1000SRS array was repeated (see Fig.…”

Sensitivity evaluation of two commercial quality assurance systems to organ-dose variations of patient-specific VMAT plans

“…ArcCHEK/MapCHECK, MatriXX with COMPASS, electronic portal imaging device, DAVID TM System, Dolphin®, Magic Plate, VANILLA, Delta4 Discover, and the double wedge-shaped ionization chamber IQM system (Casar et al, 2017;Fuangrod et al, 2016;Hoffman, Chung, Hess, Stern, & Benedict, 2017;Islam et al, 2009;Li et al, 2013;Louwe et al, 2015;Myers, Stathakis, Buckey, & Papanikolaou, 2013;Oinam, Singh, Sharma, & Goswami, 2009;Poppe et al, 2006;Björn, 2010;Sanatorium, Valley, & Kong, 2012;ScandiDos, 2016;Shimohigashi et al, 2012;Stelljes et al, 2015;Thoelking et al, 2016;Velthuis et al, 2014;Wendling et al, 2006;Wong et al, 2012;Woodruff et al, 2015). These QA systems have generally been accepted for VMAT quality assessment procedures.…”