• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.25 no.4
• /
• pp.233-241
• /
• 2014

The aim of this study is to develop a new software tool for 3D dose verification using $PRESAGE^{REU}$ Gel dosimeter. The tool included following functions: importing 3D doses from treatment planning systems (TPS), importing 3D optical density (OD), converting ODs to doses, 3D registration between two volumetric data by translational and rotational transformations, and evaluation with 3D gamma index. To acquire correlation between ODs and doses, CT images of a $PRESAGE^{REU}$ Gel with cylindrical shape was acquired, and a volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) plan was designed to give radiation doses from 1 Gy to 6 Gy to six disk-shaped virtual targets along z-axis. After the VMAT plan was delivered to the targets, 3D OD data were reconstructed from 512 projection data from $Vista^{TM}$ optical CT scanner (Modus Medical Devices Inc, Canada) per every 2 hours after irradiation. A curve for converting ODs to doses was derived by comparing TPS dose profile to OD profile along z-axis, and the 3D OD data were converted to the absorbed doses using the curve. Supra-linearity was observed between doses and ODs, and the ODs were decayed about 60% per 24 hours depending on their magnitudes. Measured doses from the $PRESAGE^{REU}$ Gel were well agreed with the TPS doses at central region, but large under-doses were observed at peripheral region at the cylindrical geometry. Gamma passing rate for 3D doses was 70.36% under the gamma criteria of 3% of dose difference and 3 mm of distance to agreement. The low passing rate was resulted from the mismatching of the refractive index between the PRESAGE gel and oil bath in the optical CT scanner. In conclusion, the developed software was useful for 3D dose verification from PRESAGE gel dosimetry, but further improvement of the Gel dosimetry system were required.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.65-73
• /
• 2017

Purpose: Machine Performance Check (MPC) is a self-checking software based on the Electronic Portal Imaging Device (EPID) to measure daily beam outputs without external installation. The purpose of this study is to verify the usefulness of MPC by comparing and correlating daily beam output of QA Beamchecker PLUS. Materials and Methods: Linear accelerator (Truebeam 2.5) was used to measure 10 energies which are composed of photon beams(6, 10, 15 MV and 6, 10 MV-FFF) and electron beams(6, 9, 12, 16 and 20 MeV). A total of 80 cycles of data was obtained by measuring beam output measurement before treatment over five months period. The Pearson correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the consistency of the beam output between the MPC and the QA Beamchecker PLUS. In this study, if the Pearson correlation coefficient is; (1) 0.8 or higher, the correlation is very strong (2) between 0.6 and 0.79, the correlation is strong (3) between 0.4 and 0.59, the correlation is moderate (4) between 0.2 and 0.39, the correlation is weak (5) lower than 0.2, the correlation is very weak. Results: Output variations observed between MPC and QA Beamchecker PLUS were within 2 % for photons and electrons. The beam outputs variations of MPC were $0.29{\pm}0.26%$ and $0.30{\pm}0.26%$ for photon and electron beams, respectively. QA Beamchecker PLUS beam outputs were $0.31{\pm}0.24%$ and $0.33{\pm}0.24%$ for photon and electron beams, respectively. The Pearson correlation coefficient between MPC and QA Beamchecker PLUS indicated that photon beams were very strong at 15 MV, and strong at 6 MV, 10 MV, 6 MV-FFF and 10 MV-FFF. For electron beams, the Pearson correlation coefficient were strong at 16 MeV and 20 MeV, moderate at 9 MeV and 12 MeV, and very weak at 6 MeV. Conclusion: MPC showed significantly strong correlation with QA Beamchecker PLUS when testing with photon beams and high-energy electron beams in the evaluation of daily beam output, but the correlation when testing with low-energy electron beams (6 MeV) appeared to be low. However, MPC and QA Beamchecker PLUS are considered to be suitable for checking daily beam output, as they performed within 2 % of beam output consistency during the observation. MPC which can perform faster than the conventional daily beam output measurement tool, is considered to be an effective method for users.

• Progress in Medical Physics
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.127-132
• /
• 2013

The position of the internal organs can change continually and periodically inside the body due to the respiration. To reduce the respiration induced uncertainty of dose localization, one can use a respiratory gated radiotherapy where a radiation beam is exposed during the specific time of period. The main disadvantage of this method is that it usually requests a long treatment time, the massive effort during the treatment and the limitation of the patient selection. In this sense, the combination of the real-time position management (RPM) system and the volumetric intensity modulated radiotherapy (RapidArc) is promising since it provides a short treatment time compared with the conventional respiratory gated treatments. In this study, we evaluated the accuracy of the respiratory gated RapidArc treatment. Total sic patient cases were used for this study and each case was planned by RapidArc technique using varian ECLIPSE v8.6 planning machine. For the Quality Assurance (QA), a MatriXX detector and I'mRT software were used. The results show that more than 97% of area gives the gamma value less than one with 3% dose and 3 mm distance to agreement condition, which indicates the measured dose is well matched with the treatment plan's dose distribution for the gated RapidArc treatment cases.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.39 no.4
• /
• pp.577-585
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of beam delivery QA software using the MLC dynalog file, about the VMAT plan with AAPM TG-119 protocol. The Clinac iX with a built-in 120 MLC was used to acquire the MLC dynalog file be imported in MobiusFx(MFX). To establish VMAT plan, Oncentra RTP system was used target and organ structures were contoured in Im'RT phantom. For evaluation of dose distribution was evaluated by using gamma index, and the point dose was evaluated by using the CC13 ion chamber in Im'RT phantom. For the evaluation of point dose, the mean of relative error between measured and calculated value was $1.41{\pm}0.92%$(Target) and $0.89{\pm}0.86%$(OAR), the confidence limit were 3.21(96.79%, Target) and 2.58(97.42%, OAR). For the evaluation of dose distribution, in case of $Delta^{4PT}$, the average percentage of passing rate were $99.78{\pm}0.2%$(3%/3 mm), $96.86{\pm}1.76%$(2%/2 mm). In case of MFX, the average percentage of passing rate were $99.90{\pm}0.14%$(3%/3 mm), $97.98{\pm}1.97%$(2%/2 mm), the confidence limits(CL) were in case of $Delta^{4PT}$ 0.62(99.38%, 3%/3 mm), 6.6(93.4%, 2%/2 mm), in case of MFX, 0.38(99.62%, 3%/3 mm), 5.88(94.12%, 2%/2 mm). In this study, we performed VMAT QA method using dynamic MLC log file compare to binary diode array chamber. All analyzed results were satisfied with acceptance criteria based on TG-119 protocol.

• Radiation Oncology Journal
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.337-344
• /
• 2000

Purpose :To design and test test CT simulator phantom for geometrical test. Materials and Methods : The PMMA phantom was designed as a cylinder which is 20 cm in diameter and 24 cm in length, along with a 25$\times25\times31cm^{3}$ rectangular parallelepiped. Radio-opaque wires of which diameter is 0.8 mm are attached on the other surface of the phantom as a spiral. The rectangular phantom was made of four 24$\times24\times0.5 cm^{3}$ square plates and each plate had a 24$\times24 cm^{2}$, 12$\times12cm^{2}$, 6$\times6 cm$^{2}$ square line. The squares were placed to face the cylinder at angles 0 $^{\circ}$ , 15 $^{\circ}$ , 30 $^{\circ}$ ,respectively. The rectangular phantom made it possible to measure the field size, couch angle, the collimator angle, the isocenter shift and the SSD, the measurements of the gantry angle from the cylindrical part. A virtual simulation software, AcOSim, offered various conditions to perform virtual simulations and these results were used to perform the geometrical Quality assurance of CT simulator. Results : A 0.3$\~$0.5 mm difference was found on the 24 cm field size which was created with the DRR measurements obtained by scanning of the rectangular phantom. The isocenter shift, the collimator rotation, the couch rotation, and the gantry rotation test showed 0.5$\~$1 mm, 0.5$\~$l$^{\circ}$ 0.5$\~$ 1$^{\circ}$ , and 0.5-1 $^{\circ}$ differences, respectively. We could not find any significant differences between the results from the two scanning methods. Conclusion :The geometrical test phantom developed in the study showed less than 1 mm (or 1 $^{\circ}$ ) differences. The phantom could be used as a routine geometrical QC/QA tools, since the differences are within clinically acceptable ranges.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.32
• /
• pp.53-59
• /
• 2020

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to compare and analyze the difference between the MLC log file-based software (Mobius) and the conventional phantom-ionization chamber (ArcCheck) dose verification method according to the change of target volume. Material and method: Radius 0.25cm, 0.5cm, 1cm, 2cm, 3cm, 4cm, 5cm, 6cm, 7cm, 8cm, 9cm, 10cm with a Sphere-shaped target Twelve plans were created and dose verification using Mobius and ArcCheck was conducted three times each. The irradiated data were compared and analyzed using the point dose error value and the gamma passing rate (3%/3mm) as evaluation indicators. Result: Mobius point dose error values were -9.87% at a radius of 0.25cm and -4.39% at 0.5cm, and the error value was within 3% at the remaining target volume. The gamma passing rate was 95% at a radius of 9cm and 93.9% at 10cm, and a passing rate of more than 95% was shown in the remaining target volume. In ArcCheck, the average error value of the point dose was about 2% in all target volumes. The gamma passing rate also showed a pass rate of 98% or more in all target volumes. Conclusion: For small targets with a radius of 0.5cm or less or a large target with a radius of 9cm or more, considering the uncertainty of DQA based on MLC log files, phantom-ionized DQA is used in complementary ways to include point dose, gamma index, DVH, and target coverage. It is believed that it is desirable to verify the dose delivery through a comprehensive analysis.

• Journal of radiological science and technology
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.109-120
• /
• 2010

The purpose of this study was first to analyze the utilization of dental examination through questionnaire to develop a diagnostic reference level of patient doses for dental radiography in korea. 77 dental institutions were classified into three groups: A group for the dental hospitals of the college of dentistry (11 institutions), B group for dental hospitals (30 institutions) and C group for dental clinics (36 institutions). The results were as follows : The mean numbers of unit chairs and medical staffs were 140.2, 15.3 and 5.8 sets, 112.6, 7.3 and 1.7 dentists, 3.1, 0.5 and no one radiologic technologists, and 19.7, 12.5 and 3.3 dental hygienists in A, B and C groups, respectively. The mean numbers of dental X-ray equipments were 14.64, 3.21 and 2.19 in A, B and C groups, respectively. Intraoral dental X-ray unit was used the most, the following equipments were panoramic, cephalometric, and cone-beam CT units. The most used X-ray imaging system was also digital system (above 50%) in all three groups. Insight dental film (Kodak, USA) having high sensitivity was routinely used for periapical radiography. The automatic processor was not used in many dental institutions, but the film-holding device was used in many dental institutions. The utilization rates of PACS in A, B and C groups were 90.9%, 83.3% and 16.7% respectively, and the PACS software program was used the most PiView STAR (Infinitt, Korea). The annual mean number of radiographic cases in one dental institution in 2008 for A group was 6.8 times and 21.2 times more than those for B and C groups, and periapical and panoramic radiographs were taken mostly. Tube voltage (kVp) and tube current (mA) for periapical radiography were similar in all three groups, but exposure time in C group was 12.0 times and 3.5 times longer than those in B and C groups. The amount of radiation exposure in C group, in which dental hygienists take dental radiographs, was more than those in other groups. The exposure parameters for panoramic radiography were similar in all three groups. In conclusion, the exposure parameters in dental radiography should be determined with reference level, not past experiences. Use of automatic processor and film-holding devices reduces the radiation exposure in film system. The quality assurance of dental equipments are necessary for the reduction of the patient dose and the improvement of X-ray image quality.