Browse > Article

Consideration of Surface Dose and Depth of Maximum Dose Using Various Detectors for High Energy X-rays  

Lee Yong Ha (Departments of Radiation Oncology Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine)
Park Kyung Ran (Departments of Radiation Oncology Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine)
Lee Jong Young (Departments of Radiation Oncology Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine)
Lee Ik Jae (Departments of Radiation Oncology Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine)
Park Young Woo (Departments of Science, Yonsei University Wonju College of Medicine)
Lee Kang Kyoo (Department of Radiation Oncology, Wonkwang University College of Medicine)
Publication Information
Radiation Oncology Journal / v.21, no.4, 2003 , pp. 322-329 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: It is difficult to exactly determine the surface dose and the dose distribution In buildup region of high energy X-rays by using the conventional ion chamber. The aim of this study Is to evaluate the accuracy of widely used dosimetry systems to measure the surface dose and the depth of maximum dose (d$_{max}$). Materials and Methods: We measured the percent depth dose (PDD) from the surface to the d$_{max}$ in either a water phantom or in a solid water phantom using TLD-100 chips, thimble type ion chamber, diode detector, diamond detector and Markus parallel plate ion chamber for 6 MV and 15 MV X-rays, 10$\times$10 cm$^{2}$, at SSD=100cm. We analysed the surface dose and the d$_{max}$. In order to verify the accuracy of the TLD data, we executed the Monte Carlo simulation for 5 MV X-ray beams. Results: The surface doses In 6 MV and IS MV X-rays were 29.31% and 23.36% ior Markus parallel plate ion chamber, 37.17$\%$ and 24.01$\%$ for TLD, 34.87$\%$ and 24.06$\%$ for diamond detector, 38.13$\%$ and 27.8$\%$ for diode detector, and 47.92$\%$ and 35.01$\%$ for thimble type ion chamber, respectively. in Monte Carlo simulation for 6 MV X-rays, the surface dose was 36.22$\%$, which Is similar to the 37.17$\%$ of the TLD measurement data. The d$_{max}$ In 6 WV and 15 MV X-rays was 14$\~$16 mm and 27$\~$29 mm, respectively. There was no significant difference in the d$_{max}$ among the detectors. Conclusion: There was a remarkable difference in the surface dose among the detectors. The Markus parallel plate chamber showed the most accurate result. The surface dose of the thimble ion chamber was 10$\%$ higher than that of other detectors. We suggest that the correction should be made when the surface dose of the thimble ion chamber Is used for the treatment planning ion the supeficial tumors. All the detectors used In our study showed no difference in the d$_{max}$.
Keywords
Surface dose; Depth of maximum dose($d_{max}$);
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Khan FM. Treatment Planning III, In:William M, Passano III, eds. The physics of radiation therpy, 2nd ed., Maryland, Williams & Wilkims, 1994:323-332
2 Manson DJ, Velkey DE, Purdy JA, Oliver GD. Measurement of surface dose using build-up curve obtained with extrapolation chamber. Radiology 1975;115:473-474   DOI   PUBMED
3 Pedersen K, Andersen TD, Olsen DR, et al. Sensitivity and stability of LiF thermoluminescence dosimeters. Med Dosim 1995;20(4):263-267   DOI   ScienceOn
4 VahcYW,ParkKR,LeeYH,etal .Improvementof X-ray beam quality for treating cancerusingdoublefocuselectric field strings. Rad Oncol Invest 1999;7:382-389   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Vahc YW, Park KR, Kwon OH, et al. The measurements of energy and distribution of scattered electronintherapeutic X-ray beam. Kor J Med Phys 2002;13:25-32
6 ICRP.1990recommendationoftheinternationalcommission on radiological protection. ICRP publication 60, Oxford, 1991: 149-153
7 AridEGA,BurnsJE,DayMJ,etal.Centralaxisdepthdosedata for use in radiotherapy. British J Radioloy 1996; supplement 25:90-98
8 DingGX.Energyspectra,angularspread,fluenceprofile and dose distribution of6and18MVphotonbeams:resultsof Monte Carlo simulations for Varian 2100EX accelerator. Phys Med Biol 2002;47:1025-1046   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
9 Yu C, Luxton G. TLD dose measurement: A simplified accuratetechniqueforthedoserangfrom0.5cGyto1000 cGy. Med Phys 1999;26(6):1010-1016
10 Kron T, MetcalfeP,WongT. Thermoluminescencedosimetry of therapeutic x-rays with Lif ribbonsandrods.PhysMedBiol 1993;38:833-845
11 Butson MJ, Rozenfeld A, Mathur JN, Carolan M, Wong TPY, MetcalfePE. A newradiotherapysurfacedosedetector:The MOSFET. Med Phys 1996;23:655-658   DOI   ScienceOn
12 ICRU. Determination of dose equivalents resulting from external radiation source. ICRUReport 39, Bethesda,1985
13 DuboisD,BiceW,BradfordB,etal. Moldabletissueequivalent bolus for high-energy photon and electron therapy. Med Phys 1996;23(9):1547-1549   DOI   ScienceOn
14 Gerbi BJ, Khan FM. Measurement of dose in the build up region using fixed-separation plane-parallel ionization chambers. Med Phys 1990;17:17-26   DOI   ScienceOn
15 Yang KM, Suh HS. Surface and percent depth doses for multileaf collimator conjunction with conventional block. Kor J Med Phys 2002;13:62-68
16 Kron T , B u t s o n M , H u n t F , e t a l. TLD extrapolation for skin dose determination in vivo. Radiotherpy and Oncology 1996;41:119-123   DOI   ScienceOn
17 Kron T, ElliotA,WongT,ShowellG,ClubbB,MetcalfeP.X-ray surface dose measurement using TLD extrapolation. Med Phys 1993;20(3):703-711   DOI   ScienceOn
18 Tello VM, Tailor RC, Hanson WF. How water equivalent are water-equivalent solid materials for output calibration of photon and electron beams? Med Phys 1995;22(7):1177-1189   DOI   PUBMED   ScienceOn
19 MalatarasG,KappasC,LovelockDMJ .AMonteCarloapproach to electron contamination sources in the Saturne-25 and -41. Phys Med Biol 2001;46:2435-2446   DOI   ScienceOn
20 Sixel KE, Podgorsak EB. Buildup region and depth of dose maximum of megavoltage x-ray beams. Med Phys 1994; 21(3):411-416   DOI   ScienceOn
21 VelkleyDE,MansonDJ,PurdyJA,OliverGD. Buildup region of megavoltage photon radiation source. Med Phys 1975;2:14-19   DOI   ScienceOn
22 NilsonB,Montelius A. Fluenceperturbation in photon beams under non-equilibrium condition. Med Phys 1986;13: 191-195   DOI   ScienceOn
23 Ferguson S, Ostwald P, Kron T, Denham J. Verification of surfacedoseonPatientundergoinglowtomediumenergy X-ray therapy. Medical dosimetry 1995;20(3):161-165   DOI   ScienceOn
24 Lin JP, Chu TC, Lin SY, Liu MT. Skin dose measurement by using ultra-thin TLDs. Applide Radiation and Isotopes 2001;55:383-391   DOI   ScienceOn
25 Khan FM, Moore VC, Levitt SH. Effect of various atomic number absorbers on skin dose for 10-MeV X-rays. Radiology 1973;109:209