Cargando…
Evaluation of dose delivery accuracy of Gamma Knife by polymer gel dosimetry
The BANG™ polymer gel dosimeter was used to evaluate 3D absorbed dose distributions in tissue delivered with Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery systems. We compared dose distributions calculated with Leksell GammaPlan (LGP) treatment‐planning software with dose distributions measured with the pol...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2005
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5723498/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16143798 http://dx.doi.org/10.1120/jacmp.v6i3.2110 |
Sumario: | The BANG™ polymer gel dosimeter was used to evaluate 3D absorbed dose distributions in tissue delivered with Gamma Knife stereotactic radiosurgery systems. We compared dose distributions calculated with Leksell GammaPlan (LGP) treatment‐planning software with dose distributions measured with the polymer gel dosimeter for single‐shot irradiations. Head‐sized spherical glass vessels filled with the polymer gel were irradiated with Gamma Knife. The phantoms were scanned with a 1.0T MRI scanner. The Hahn spin‐echo sequence with two echoes was used for the MRI scans. Calibration relations between the spin‐spin relaxation rate and the absorbed dose were obtained by using small cylindrical vials, which were filled with the polymer gel from the same batch as for the spherical phantom. We made voxel‐by‐voxel comparisons of measured and calculated dose distributions for [Formula: see text] dose matrix elements. With the 3D dose data we calculated the tumor control probability (TCP) and normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) for a simple model. For the maximum dose of 100 Gy, the mean and one standard deviation of differences between the measured and the calculated doses were the following: [Formula: see text] Gy, and [Formula: see text] for 8‐mm, 14‐mm, and 18‐mm collimators, respectively. Tumor control probability values for measurements were smaller than the calculations by 0% to 7%, whereas NTCP values were larger by 7% to 24% for four of six experiments. PACS numbers: 87.53.‐j, 87.53.Dq, 87.53.Ly |
---|