한국의학물리학회지:의학물리 (Progress in Medical Physics)

  • 제26권3호
  • /
  • Pages.153-159
  • /
  • 2015
  • /
  • 2508-4445(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2508-4453(eISSN)
한국의학물리학회 (Korean Society of Medical Physics)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

동적 세기조절방사선치료에서 깊이에 따른 DLG변화 분석

Evaluation of Dosimetric Leaf Gap (DLG) at Different Depths for Dynamic IMRT

  • 장경환 (서울아산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 곽정원 (서울아산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 조병철 (서울아산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 정치영 (서울아산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 배재범 (서울아산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 윤상민 (서울아산병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 이상욱 (서울아산병원 방사선종양학과)
  • 투고 : 2015.09.15
  • 심사 : 2015.09.21
  • 발행 : 2015.09.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

본 연구에서는 동적 세기조절방사선치료에서 깊이에 따른 DLG (Dosimetric Leaf Gap)의 변화가 치료계획시스템에서의 선량계산의 정확성에 미치는 영향을 평가하고자 하였다. 6 MV와 15 MV광자선에 대하여 동일한 SAD 조건하에 4개의 다른 깊이(2 cm, 5 cm, 10 cm, 15 cm)에서 측정된 다엽콜리메이터의 투과계수와 DLG 값을 치료계획시스템에 적용하여 DLG 측정 과정을 모사하였을 때 계산된 투과계수와 DLG 값들을 각각의 측정값들과 비교하여 분석하였다. 이를 위하여 Millenium 120 MLC시스템이 장착 된 단일 선형가속기가 사용되었다. 각각 다른 깊이에서 측정된 DLG와 투과계수 값을 적용하였을 때 치료계획시스템을 이용한 모사에서는 투과계수의 경우 1% 이내로 계산과 측정이 일치함을 보이는 반면에 DLG 값은 15 MV 경우 5% 이내의 차이를 보이고 6 MV에서는 최대 깊이인 15 cm에서 15% 이상 차이가 보였다. 실제의 경우 15 MV 경우 15 cm 깊이까지 DLG의 변화에 의한 실험과 계산의 차이가 작은 반면 6 MV 경우, 10 cm 이상의 깊이에서는 치료계획 시스템에서 계산된 값이 측정과 크게 차이를 나타냈다. 다엽콜리메이터 투과계수를 기준 조건하에서 측정한 고정된 값을 치료계획시스템에 적용하였을 때 측정 깊이에 따른 고정된 투과계수 값과 변화된 투과계수 값의 차이는 크지는 않지만 종양이 위치하는 깊이에 따라서 선량학적 영향이 나타날 수 있으므로 깊이에 따른 다엽콜리메이터 투과계수 및 DLG 값을 각각의 치료계획에 반영하여 환자 맞춤형 치료계획이 될 수 있도록 해야 할 것이다.

This study is to evaluate thedosiemtric leaf gap (DLG) at different depths for dynamic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) in order to evaluate the absolute dose and dose distribution according to the different positions of tumors and compare the measured and planned the multileaf collimator (MLC) transmission factor (T.F.) and DLG values. We used the 6 MV and 15 MV photon beam from linear accelerator with a Millenium 120 MLC system. After the import the DICOM RT files, we measured the absolute dose at different depths (2 cm, 5 cm, 10 cm, and 15 cm) to calculate the MLC T. F. and DLG. For 6 MV photon beam, the measured both MLC T. F. and DLG were increased with the increase the measured depths. When applying to treatment planning systemas fixed transmission factor with its value measured under the reference condition at depth of 5 cm, although the difference fixed and varied transmission factor is not significant, the dosiemtric effect could be presented according to the depth that the tumor is placed. Therefore, we are planning to investigate the treatment planning system whichthe T. F. and DLG factor according to at the different depths can be applied in the patient-specific treatment plan.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Otto K: Volumetric modulated arc therapy: IMRT in a single gantry arc. Med Phys. 35:310-317 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2818738
  2. Xing L, Thorndyke B, Schreibmann E, Yang Y, Li TF, Kim GY, Luxton G, Koong A: Overview of image-guided radiation therapy. Med Dosim. 31:91-112 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meddos.2005.12.004
  3. Yoon SM, Lim YS, Park MJ, et al: Stereotactic body radiation therapy as an alternative treatment for small hepatocellular carcinoma. PLoS One. 8:e79854 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079854
  4. Kantz S, Sohn M, Troeller A et al: Impact of MLC properties and IMRT technique in meningioma and head-and-neck treatments. RadiatOncol. 10:184 (2015)
  5. Yu CX1, Li XA, Ma L, et al: Clinical implementation of intensity- modulated arc therapy. Int J RadiatOncolBiol Phys. 53:453-63 (2002)
  6. Huq MS, Das IJ, Steinberg T, Galvin JM: A dosimetric comparison of various multileaf collimators. Phys Med Biol. 47:N159-70 (2002) https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/47/12/401
  7. Williams MJ, Metcalfe P: Verification of a rounded leaf-end MLC model used in a radiotherapy treatment planning system. Phys Med Biol. 51:N65-78 (2006) https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/51/4/N03
  8. Mohan R, Jayesh K, Joshi RC, et al: Dosimetric evaluation of 120-leaf multileaf collimator in a Varian linear accelerator with 6-MV and 18-MV photon beams. J Med Phys. 33:114-8 (2008) https://doi.org/10.4103/0971-6203.42757
  9. Wu QJ, Wang Z, Kirkpatrick JP, et al: Impact of collimator leaf width and treatment technique on stereotactic radiosurgery and radiotherapy plans for intra- and extracranial lesions. RadiatOncol. 21:4 (2009)
  10. Hong CS, Ju SG, Kim M, et al: Dosimetric effects of multileaf collimator leaf width on intensity-modulated radiotherapy for head and neck cancer. Med Phys. 41:021712 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4860155
  11. Sharma DS, Dongre PM, Mhatre V, Heigrujam M: Physical and dosimetric characteristic of high-definition multileaf collimator (HDMLC) for SRS and IMRT. J ApplClin Med Phys. 12:3475 (2011)
  12. LoSasso T, Chui CS, Ling CC: Physical and dosimetric aspects of a multileaf collimation system used in the dynamic mode for implementing intensity modulated radiotherapy. Med Phys. 25:1919-27 (1999)
  13. Wijesooriya K, Bartee C, Siebers JV, et al: Determination of maximum leaf velocity and acceleration of a dynamic multileaf collimator: implications for 4D radiotherapy. Med Phys. 32:932-41 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1876581
  14. Shang Q, Qi P, Ferjani S, Xia P: Effect of MLC leaf width on treatment adaptation and accuracy for concurrent irradiation of prostate and pelvic lymph nodes. Med Phys. 40:061701 (2013) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4803499
  15. Kumaraswamy LK, Schmitt JD, Bailey DW, et al: Spatial variation of dosimetric leaf gap and its impact on dose delivery. Med Phys. 41:111711 (2014) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4897572
  16. Kielar KN, Mok E, Hsu A, Wang L, Luxton G: Verification of dosimetric accuracy on the TrueBeamSTx: rounded leaf effect of the high definition MLC. Med Phys. 39:6360-71 (2012) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.4752444
  17. Yao W, Farr JB: Determining the optimal dosimetric leaf gap setting for rounded leaf-end multileaf collimator systems by simple test fields. J ApplClin Med Phys. 16(4):5321 (2015)
  18. Lee JW, Choi KS, Hong S, et al: Effects of static dosimetric leaf gap on MLC-based small-beam dose distribution for intensity- modulated radiosurgery. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 8:2397 (2007)
  19. Mei X, Nygren I, Villarreal-Barajas JE: On the use of the MLC dosimetric leaf gap as a quality control tool for accurate dynamic IMRT delivery. Med Phys. 38:2246-55 (2011) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3567148
  20. Szpala S, Cao F, Kohli K: On using the dosimetric leaf gap to model the rounded leaf ends in VMAT/RapidArc plans. J ApplClin Med Phys. 15:4484 (2014)
  21. Wasbo E, Valen H: Dosimetric discrepancies caused by differing MLC parameters for dynamic IMRT. Phys Med Biol. 53(2):405-15 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/53/2/008

피인용 문헌

  1. Clinical Implications of High Definition Multileaf Collimator (HDMLC) Dosimetric Leaf Gap (DLG) Variations vol.27, pp.3, 2016, https://doi.org/10.14316/pmp.2016.27.3.111