Cargando…
Commissioning a 50–100 kV X‐ray unit for skin cancer treatment
This study provides the authors' experience along with dosimetric data from the commissioning of two Sensus SRT‐100 50‐100 kV X‐ray units. Data collected during the commissioning process included: a) HVL, b) output (dose rate), c) applicator cone factors, and d) percentage depth dose. A Farmer‐...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5690081/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26103186 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i2.5182 |
_version_ | 1783279525034983424 |
---|---|
author | Sheu, Ren‐Dih Powers, Allison Lo, Yeh‐Chi |
author_facet | Sheu, Ren‐Dih Powers, Allison Lo, Yeh‐Chi |
author_sort | Sheu, Ren‐Dih |
collection | PubMed |
description | This study provides the authors' experience along with dosimetric data from the commissioning of two Sensus SRT‐100 50‐100 kV X‐ray units. Data collected during the commissioning process included: a) HVL, b) output (dose rate), c) applicator cone factors, and d) percentage depth dose. A Farmer‐type chamber (PTW‐N23333), and a thin‐window parallel plate ion chamber (PTW‐N23342) were used for dose rate measurements and dose profiles were measured with EBT3 GafChromic film. The average HVL values for 50, 70, and 100 kV of the two treatment units were found to be 0.52, 1.15, and 2.20 mm Al, respectively. The HVL's were 5%–9% lower when measured with the Farmer chamber, as compared to measurements with the parallel plate chamber, for energies of 70 and 100 kV. Dose rates were also measured to be 3%–4% lower with the Farmer chamber. The dose rate variation between the two units was found to be 2%–9% for 50, 70, and 100 kV. The dose uniformity over a circle of 2 cm diameter was within 4% in four cardinal directions; however, the dose profiles for the 5 cm applicator were nonuniform, especially in the cathode–anode direction. Measurements indicated as much as 15% lower dose for the 50 kV beam at field edge on the anode side, when normalized to the center. The crossline profile was relatively more symmetric, with a maximum deviation of 10% at the field edge. All ion chamber readings agreed with film measurements within 3%. The nonuniform profile produced by these units may introduce uncertainty in dose rate measurements, especially for larger applicators. Since there is no intrinsic tool (crosshair or field light) for alignment with the beam axis, the user should take care when positioning the chamber for output measurements. The data obtained with a Farmer‐type chamber should be used cautiously and as a reference only for the SRT‐100 X‐ray treatment unit. PACS number: 87.53.Bn |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5690081 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56900812018-04-02 Commissioning a 50–100 kV X‐ray unit for skin cancer treatment Sheu, Ren‐Dih Powers, Allison Lo, Yeh‐Chi J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics This study provides the authors' experience along with dosimetric data from the commissioning of two Sensus SRT‐100 50‐100 kV X‐ray units. Data collected during the commissioning process included: a) HVL, b) output (dose rate), c) applicator cone factors, and d) percentage depth dose. A Farmer‐type chamber (PTW‐N23333), and a thin‐window parallel plate ion chamber (PTW‐N23342) were used for dose rate measurements and dose profiles were measured with EBT3 GafChromic film. The average HVL values for 50, 70, and 100 kV of the two treatment units were found to be 0.52, 1.15, and 2.20 mm Al, respectively. The HVL's were 5%–9% lower when measured with the Farmer chamber, as compared to measurements with the parallel plate chamber, for energies of 70 and 100 kV. Dose rates were also measured to be 3%–4% lower with the Farmer chamber. The dose rate variation between the two units was found to be 2%–9% for 50, 70, and 100 kV. The dose uniformity over a circle of 2 cm diameter was within 4% in four cardinal directions; however, the dose profiles for the 5 cm applicator were nonuniform, especially in the cathode–anode direction. Measurements indicated as much as 15% lower dose for the 50 kV beam at field edge on the anode side, when normalized to the center. The crossline profile was relatively more symmetric, with a maximum deviation of 10% at the field edge. All ion chamber readings agreed with film measurements within 3%. The nonuniform profile produced by these units may introduce uncertainty in dose rate measurements, especially for larger applicators. Since there is no intrinsic tool (crosshair or field light) for alignment with the beam axis, the user should take care when positioning the chamber for output measurements. The data obtained with a Farmer‐type chamber should be used cautiously and as a reference only for the SRT‐100 X‐ray treatment unit. PACS number: 87.53.Bn John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2015-03-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5690081/ /pubmed/26103186 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i2.5182 Text en © 2015 The Authors. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Radiation Oncology Physics Sheu, Ren‐Dih Powers, Allison Lo, Yeh‐Chi Commissioning a 50–100 kV X‐ray unit for skin cancer treatment |
title | Commissioning a 50–100 kV X‐ray unit for skin cancer treatment |
title_full | Commissioning a 50–100 kV X‐ray unit for skin cancer treatment |
title_fullStr | Commissioning a 50–100 kV X‐ray unit for skin cancer treatment |
title_full_unstemmed | Commissioning a 50–100 kV X‐ray unit for skin cancer treatment |
title_short | Commissioning a 50–100 kV X‐ray unit for skin cancer treatment |
title_sort | commissioning a 50–100 kv x‐ray unit for skin cancer treatment |
topic | Radiation Oncology Physics |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5690081/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26103186 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i2.5182 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT sheurendih commissioninga50100kvxrayunitforskincancertreatment AT powersallison commissioninga50100kvxrayunitforskincancertreatment AT loyehchi commissioninga50100kvxrayunitforskincancertreatment |