Browse > Article

Evaluation of surface dose comparison by treatment equipment  

Choi Eun Ha (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center)
Yoon Bo Reum (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center)
Park Byoung Suk (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center)
An Ye Chan (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center)
Park Myoung Hwan (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center)
Park Yong Chul (Department of Radiation Oncology, Samsung Medical Center)
Publication Information
The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy / v.34, no., 2022 , pp. 31-42 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: This study measures and compares the surface dose values in the virtual target volume using Tomotherapy, Halcyon, and TrueBeam equipment using 6MV-Flattening Filter-Free(FFF) energy. Materials and Methods: CT scan was performed under three conditions of without bolus, 0.5 cm bolus, and 1 cm bolus using an IMRT phantom (IBA, Germany). The Planning Target Volume (PTV) was set at the virtual target depth, and the treatment plan was established at 200 cGy at a time. For surface dosimetry, the Gafchromic EBT3 film was placed in the same section as the treatment planning system and repeated measurements were performed 10 times and then analyzed. Result: As a result of measuring the surface dose for each equipment, without, 0.5 cm, 1 cm bolus is in this order, and the result of Tomotherapy is 115.2±2.0 cGy, 194.4±3.3 cGy, 200.7±2.9 cGy, The result in Halcyon was 104.7±3.0 cGy, 180.1±10.8 cGy, 187.0±10.1 cGy, and the result in TrueBeam was 92.4±3.2 cGy, 148.6±5.7 cGy, 155.8±6.1 cGy, In all three conditions, the same as the treatment planning system, Tomotherapy, Halcyon, TreuBeam was measured highly in that order. Conclusion: Higher surface doses were measured in Tomotherapy and Halcyon compared to TrueBeam equipment. If the characteristics of each equipment are considered according to the treatment site and treatment purpose, it is expected that the treatment efficiency of the patient will increase as well as the treatment satisfaction of the patient.
Keywords
Surface Dose; Halcyon; TrueBeam; Tomotherapy; Gafchromic EBT3;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Perz CA, Brady LW : "Principle and Practice of Radiation Oncology," 2nd ed. Philadelphia, JB Lippincott Co, 1992; pp.51-55
2 Sigamani A, Nambiraj A, Yadav G et al : Surface dose measurements and comparison of unflattened and flattened photon beams. J Med Phys. 2016;Vol 41(2):85-91   DOI
3 Erica B. Collen and Monique N. Mayer : Acute effects of radiation treatment: Skin reactions. Can Vet J. 2006;Vol 47(9):931-935
4 Sharma M, Chow JCL : Skin dose enhancement from the application of skin-care creams using FF and FFF photon beams in radiotherapy: A Monte Carlo phantom evaluation. AIMS Bioengineering. 2020; Vol 7 Issue2: 82-90   DOI
5 Fischbach M, Halg RA, Hartmann M, Besserer J, Gruber G, Schneider U : Measurement of skin and target dose in post-mastectomy radiotherapy using 4 and 6 MV photon beams. Radiation Oncology (London, England). 2013; Vol 8:270
6 Wang L , Cmelak AJ, Ding GX : A simple technique to improve calculated skin dose accuracy in a commercial treatment planning system, Journal of applied clinical medical physics.2018; Vol 19(2):191-197
7 Rijken J, Kairn T, Crowe S, Munoz L, Trapp J : A simple method to account for skin dose enhancement during treatment planning of VMAT treatments of patients in contact with immobilization equipment. Journal of applied clinical medical physics.2018;Vol 19(4):239-245
8 Mohammed M, Chakir E, Boukhal H, Mroan S, Bardouni TEl : Evaluation of the dosimetric characteristics of 6 MV flattened and unflattened photon beam. Journal of King Saud University - Science. 2017;Vol 29 Issue 3:Pages 371-379   DOI
9 Wang Y, Khan MK, Ting JY, Easterling SB : Surface Dose Investigation of the Flattening FilterFree Photon Beams. International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics. 2012;Vol 83(2):e281-5   DOI
10 Meshram MN, Pramanik S, Ranjith CP, Gopal SK, Dobhal R : Dosimetric properties of equivalent-quality flattening filter-free (FFF) and flattened photon beams of Versa HD linear accelerator, Journal of applied clinical medical physics. 2016;Vol 17(3):358-370   DOI
11 Everardo FM, Kim GY, Yashar CM, Cervino LI : Dosimetric study of the plan quality and dose to organs at risk on tangential breast treatments using the Halcyon linac. Journal of applied clinical medical physics. 2019;Vol 20(7):58-67   DOI
12 Sun T, Lin X, Zhang G, Qiu Q, Li C, Yin Y : Treatment planning comparison of volumetric modulated arc therapy with the trilogy and the Halcyon for bilateral breast cancer. Radiation oncology(London, England). 2021;Vol 16(1):35
13 Sorriaux J, Kacperek A, Rossomme S, Lee JA, Bertrand D, Vynckier S, Sterpin E : Evaluation of GafchromicEBT3 films characteristics in therapy photon, electron and proton beams. Physica medica. 2013; Vol 29(6):599-606   DOI
14 Borca VC, Pasquino M, Russo G : Dosimetric characterization and use of GAFCHROMIC EBT3 film for IMRT dose verification. Journal of applied clinical medical physics. 2013;Vol 14(2):4111
15 Vu TTT, Pignol JP, Rakovitch E, Spayne J, Paszat L : Variability in Radiation Oncologists' Opinion on the Indication of a Bolus in Postmastectomy Radiotherapy: an International Survey. Clinical oncology (R Coll Radiol). 2007; Vol 19(2):115-9   DOI
16 Hardcastle N, Soisson E, Metcalfe P, Rosenfeld AB, Tome WA : Dosimetric verification of helical tomotherapy for total scalp irradiation. Medical physics. 2008;Vol 35:5061-5068    DOI
17 O'Grady F, Barsky AR, Anamalayil S et al : Increase in Superficial Dose in Whole-Breast Irradiation With Halcyon Straight-Through Linac Compared With Traditional C-arm Linac With Flattening Filter: In vivo Dosimetry and Planning Study. Advances in radiation oncology .Vol 5(1) 2020:120-126   DOI