Cargando…

Detectors assessment for stereotactic radiosurgery with cones

The purpose of this work is to assess eight detectors performance for output factor (OF), percent depth dose (PDD), and beam profiles in a 6‐MV Clinac stereotactic radiosurgery mode for cone irradiation using Monte Carlo simulation as reference. Cones with diameters comprised between 30 and 4 mm hav...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Garnier, Nicolas, Amblard, Régis, Villeneuve, Rémy, Haykal, Rodolphe, Ortholan, Cécile, Colin, Philippe, Gérard, Anaïs, Belhomme, Sarah, Mady, Franck, Benabdesselam, Mourad, Serrano, Benjamin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6236831/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30216702
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12449
_version_ 1783371089973346304
author Garnier, Nicolas
Amblard, Régis
Villeneuve, Rémy
Haykal, Rodolphe
Ortholan, Cécile
Colin, Philippe
Gérard, Anaïs
Belhomme, Sarah
Mady, Franck
Benabdesselam, Mourad
Serrano, Benjamin
author_facet Garnier, Nicolas
Amblard, Régis
Villeneuve, Rémy
Haykal, Rodolphe
Ortholan, Cécile
Colin, Philippe
Gérard, Anaïs
Belhomme, Sarah
Mady, Franck
Benabdesselam, Mourad
Serrano, Benjamin
author_sort Garnier, Nicolas
collection PubMed
description The purpose of this work is to assess eight detectors performance for output factor (OF), percent depth dose (PDD), and beam profiles in a 6‐MV Clinac stereotactic radiosurgery mode for cone irradiation using Monte Carlo simulation as reference. Cones with diameters comprised between 30 and 4 mm have been studied. The evaluated detectors were ionization chambers: pinpoint and pinpoint 3D, diodes: SRS, P and E, Edge, MicroDiamond and EBT3 radiochromic films. The results showed that pinpoints underestimate OF up to −2.3% for cone diameters ≥10 mm and down to −12% for smaller cones. Both nonshielded (SRS and E) and shielded diodes (P and Edge) overestimate the OF respectively up to 3.3% and 5.2% for cone diameters ≥10 mm and in both cases more than 7% for smaller cones. MicroDiamond slightly overestimates the OF, 3.7% for all the cones and EBT3 film is the closest to Monte Carlo with maximum difference of ±1% whatever the cone size is. For the profiles and the PDD, particularly for the small cones, the size of the detector predominates. All diodes and EBT3 agree with the simulation within ±0.2 mm for beam profiles determination. For PDD curve all the active detectors response agree with simulation up to 1% for all the cones. EBT3 is the more accurate detector for beam profiles and OF determinations of stereotactic cones but it is restrictive to use. Due to respectively inappropriate size of the sensitive volume and composition, pinpoints and diodes do not seem appropriate without OF corrective factors below 10 mm diameter cone. MicroDiamond appears to be the best detector for OF determination regardless all cones. For off‐axis measurements, the size of the detector predominates and for PDD all detectors give promising results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6236831
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62368312018-11-20 Detectors assessment for stereotactic radiosurgery with cones Garnier, Nicolas Amblard, Régis Villeneuve, Rémy Haykal, Rodolphe Ortholan, Cécile Colin, Philippe Gérard, Anaïs Belhomme, Sarah Mady, Franck Benabdesselam, Mourad Serrano, Benjamin J Appl Clin Med Phys Radiation Oncology Physics The purpose of this work is to assess eight detectors performance for output factor (OF), percent depth dose (PDD), and beam profiles in a 6‐MV Clinac stereotactic radiosurgery mode for cone irradiation using Monte Carlo simulation as reference. Cones with diameters comprised between 30 and 4 mm have been studied. The evaluated detectors were ionization chambers: pinpoint and pinpoint 3D, diodes: SRS, P and E, Edge, MicroDiamond and EBT3 radiochromic films. The results showed that pinpoints underestimate OF up to −2.3% for cone diameters ≥10 mm and down to −12% for smaller cones. Both nonshielded (SRS and E) and shielded diodes (P and Edge) overestimate the OF respectively up to 3.3% and 5.2% for cone diameters ≥10 mm and in both cases more than 7% for smaller cones. MicroDiamond slightly overestimates the OF, 3.7% for all the cones and EBT3 film is the closest to Monte Carlo with maximum difference of ±1% whatever the cone size is. For the profiles and the PDD, particularly for the small cones, the size of the detector predominates. All diodes and EBT3 agree with the simulation within ±0.2 mm for beam profiles determination. For PDD curve all the active detectors response agree with simulation up to 1% for all the cones. EBT3 is the more accurate detector for beam profiles and OF determinations of stereotactic cones but it is restrictive to use. Due to respectively inappropriate size of the sensitive volume and composition, pinpoints and diodes do not seem appropriate without OF corrective factors below 10 mm diameter cone. MicroDiamond appears to be the best detector for OF determination regardless all cones. For off‐axis measurements, the size of the detector predominates and for PDD all detectors give promising results. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-09-14 /pmc/articles/PMC6236831/ /pubmed/30216702 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12449 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of American Association of Physicists in Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Radiation Oncology Physics
Garnier, Nicolas
Amblard, Régis
Villeneuve, Rémy
Haykal, Rodolphe
Ortholan, Cécile
Colin, Philippe
Gérard, Anaïs
Belhomme, Sarah
Mady, Franck
Benabdesselam, Mourad
Serrano, Benjamin
Detectors assessment for stereotactic radiosurgery with cones
title Detectors assessment for stereotactic radiosurgery with cones
title_full Detectors assessment for stereotactic radiosurgery with cones
title_fullStr Detectors assessment for stereotactic radiosurgery with cones
title_full_unstemmed Detectors assessment for stereotactic radiosurgery with cones
title_short Detectors assessment for stereotactic radiosurgery with cones
title_sort detectors assessment for stereotactic radiosurgery with cones
topic Radiation Oncology Physics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6236831/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30216702
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acm2.12449
work_keys_str_mv AT garniernicolas detectorsassessmentforstereotacticradiosurgerywithcones
AT amblardregis detectorsassessmentforstereotacticradiosurgerywithcones
AT villeneuveremy detectorsassessmentforstereotacticradiosurgerywithcones
AT haykalrodolphe detectorsassessmentforstereotacticradiosurgerywithcones
AT ortholancecile detectorsassessmentforstereotacticradiosurgerywithcones
AT colinphilippe detectorsassessmentforstereotacticradiosurgerywithcones
AT gerardanais detectorsassessmentforstereotacticradiosurgerywithcones
AT belhommesarah detectorsassessmentforstereotacticradiosurgerywithcones
AT madyfranck detectorsassessmentforstereotacticradiosurgerywithcones
AT benabdesselammourad detectorsassessmentforstereotacticradiosurgerywithcones
AT serranobenjamin detectorsassessmentforstereotacticradiosurgerywithcones