Cargando…

Episcleral eye plaque dosimetry comparison for the Eye Physics EP917 using Plaque Simulator and Monte Carlo simulation

This work is a comparative study of the dosimetry calculated by Plaque Simulator, a treatment planning system for eye plaque brachytherapy, to the dosimetry calculated using Monte Carlo simulation for an Eye Physics model EP917 eye plaque. Monte Carlo (MC) simulation using MCNPX 2.7 was used to calc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Zimmermann, Leonard W., Amoush, Ahmad, Wilkinson, Douglas A.
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/PMC5691011/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26699577
http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v16i6.5659
Descripción
Sumario:This work is a comparative study of the dosimetry calculated by Plaque Simulator, a treatment planning system for eye plaque brachytherapy, to the dosimetry calculated using Monte Carlo simulation for an Eye Physics model EP917 eye plaque. Monte Carlo (MC) simulation using MCNPX 2.7 was used to calculate the central axis dose in water for an EP917 eye plaque fully loaded with 17 IsoAid Advantage [Formula: see text] seeds. In addition, the dosimetry parameters [Formula: see text] , and [Formula: see text] were calculated for the IsoAid Advantage model IAI‐125 [Formula: see text] seed and benchmarked against published data. Bebig Plaque Simulator (PS) v5.74 was used to calculate the central axis dose based on the AAPM Updated Task Group 43 (TG‐43U1) dose formalism. The calculated central axis dose from MC and PS was then compared. When the MC dosimetry parameters for the IsoAid Advantage [Formula: see text] seed were compared with the consensus values, Λ agreed with the consensus value to within 2.3%. However, much larger differences were found between MC calculated gL(r) and [Formula: see text] and the consensus values. The differences between MC‐calculated dosimetry parameters are much smaller when compared with recently published data. The differences between the calculated central axis absolute dose from MC and PS ranged from 5% to 10% for distances between 1 and 12 mm from the outer scleral surface. When the dosimetry parameters for the [Formula: see text] seed from this study were used in PS, the calculated absolute central axis dose differences were reduced by 2.3% from depths of 4 to 12 mm from the outer scleral surface. We conclude that PS adequately models the central dose profile of this plaque using its defaults for the IsoAid model IAI‐125 at distances of 1 to 7 mm from the outer scleral surface. However, improved dose accuracy can be obtained by using updated dosimetry parameters for the IsoAid model IAI‐125 [Formula: see text] seed. PACS number: 87.55.K‐