Experimental investigation of the response of an EPID to an unflattened photon beam from an Elekta Precise linear accelerator

Abstract

The characteristics of an Elekta amorphous silicon (a-Si) electronic portal imaging device (EPID) in response to a 6 MV photon beam generated without a flattening filter, an unflattened beam, have been determined. The characteristics were then compared to those for a conventional photon beam generated with a flattening filter in the beam, a flattened beam, in order to determine the suitability of an a-Si EPID for transit dosimetry. The response of the EPID to the unflattened beam increased by 7.3% compared to the flattened beam, and copper buildup of 3 mm reduces the variation in the EPID response over air gaps ranging from 60 to 40 cm to within 2.5%. The scattering properties of the EPID with changing field size for the unflattened beam agree with those measured for a flattened beam to within 2%. Due to the minimal variation in the energy spectrum of the unflattened beam with the distance from the central axis, it was expected and experimentally found that the profile shape of the unflattened beam changes minimally with increasing phantom thickness. For an unflattened beam, EPID measured profiles with and without a phantom in the beam agree to within 2% using confidence limits. The difference between EPID and ionization chamber profiles measured at a depth of 5 cm in water is reduced compared to a flattened beam and remains unchanged with increasing phantom thickness. A difference of 4% was found between EPID profiles and the corresponding profiles measured with an ionization chamber measured in water over a range of phantom thickness. A calibration procedure was developed to convert EPID images to the equivalent absolute dose in water, at the EPID plane. A gamma evaluation was performed comparing the calibrated EPID images to dose measured with an ionization chamber array for rectangular fields and an IMRT segment. The fields were situated on axis and at 5 cm off axis with and without a 25 cm thick phantom in the beam. The gamma evaluation criteria of 3% and 3 mm were met within the field, for all fields examined. This study concludes that a-Si EPIDs are suitable dosimeters for IMRT treatments using unflattened photon beams with the advantage that the characteristics of the unflattened beam result in a reduction in the number of measurements necessary to calibrate an a-Si EPID as a transit dosimeter.

A dosimetric evaluation of flattening filter-free volumetric modulated arc therapy in nasopharyngeal carcinoma

“…[718] As an exploratory study, an easier and safer way was adopted in our study: The 6MV photon FF was replaced with the 6MeV electron scatter foil. In such a way, only the configurations of the LINAC control software needed to be changed and the LINAC could be easily restored to its original clinical mode when the research work done.…”

A simple quality assurance test tool for the visual verification of light and radiation field congruent using electronic portal images device and computed radiography

“…The detector can be moved in the longitudinal and lateral directions. It is made of the following layers: Aluminum top cover, air gap, 1 mm thick copper plate, graphite layer, LANEX Fast terbium-doped gadolinium oxysulfide phosphor screen (Gd 2 O 2 S:Tb), attenuating film and a-Si:H photodiode array [14,15]. Image data is read between the radiation pulses, which is synchronized by the PPG PCB and controlled by a Detector Control Board (DCB).…”

Epid Dosimetry

“…studied three Siemens OptiVue EPIDs used for transit dosimetry and introduced a calibration model that includes corrections for differential energy response. In a different approach, Tyner et al 52 found that using unflattened photon beams could reduce the differences between on and off axis response for their Elekta iView GT a-Si EPID. They compared the EPID profiles with ionization chamber profiles and found that with the flattened beam the EPID off-axis response decreased with phantom thickness (to as low as 2% for 30 cm phantom), while for the unflattened beam the off-axis response difference was consistent for any phantom thickness.…”