Cargando…

Quality Assurance for Small-Field VMAT SRS and Conventional-Field IMRT Using the Exradin W1 Scintillator

BACKGROUND: Plastic scintillator detector (PSD) Exradin W1 has shown promising performance in small field dosimetry due to its water equivalence and small sensitive volume. However, few studies reported its capability in measuring fields of conventional sizes. Therefore, the purpose of this study is...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Huang, Zike, Qiao, Jian, Yang, Cui, Liu, Ming, Wang, Jiazhou, Han, Xu, Hu, Weigang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8327019/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34328800
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15330338211036542
_version_ 1783731975389970432
author Huang, Zike
Qiao, Jian
Yang, Cui
Liu, Ming
Wang, Jiazhou
Han, Xu
Hu, Weigang
author_facet Huang, Zike
Qiao, Jian
Yang, Cui
Liu, Ming
Wang, Jiazhou
Han, Xu
Hu, Weigang
author_sort Huang, Zike
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Plastic scintillator detector (PSD) Exradin W1 has shown promising performance in small field dosimetry due to its water equivalence and small sensitive volume. However, few studies reported its capability in measuring fields of conventional sizes. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to assess the performance of W1 in measuring point dose of both conventional IMRT plans and VMAT SRS plans. METHODS: Forty-seven clinical plans (including 29 IMRT plans and 18 VMAT SRS plans with PTV volume less than 8 cm(3)) from our hospital were included in this study. W1 and Farmer-Type ionization chamber Exradin A19 were used in measuring IMRT plans, and W1 and microchamber Exradin A16 were used in measuring SRS plans. The agreement between the results of different types of detectors and TPS was evaluated. RESULTS: For IMRT plans, the average differences between measurements and TPS in high-dose regions were 0.27% ± 1.66% and 0.90% ± 1.78% (P = 0.056), and were −0.76% ± 1.47% and 0.37% ± 1.34% in low-dose regions (P = 0.000), for W1 and A19, respectively. For VMAT SRS plans, the average differences between measurements and TPS were −0.19% ± 0.96% and −0.59% ± 1.49% for W1 and A16 with no statistical difference (P = 0.231). CONCLUSION: W1 showed comparable performance with application-dedicated detectors in point dose measurements for both conventional IMRT and VMAT SRS techniques. It is a potential one-stop solution for general radiotherapy platforms that deliver both IMRT and SRS plans.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8327019
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83270192021-08-09 Quality Assurance for Small-Field VMAT SRS and Conventional-Field IMRT Using the Exradin W1 Scintillator Huang, Zike Qiao, Jian Yang, Cui Liu, Ming Wang, Jiazhou Han, Xu Hu, Weigang Technol Cancer Res Treat Original Article BACKGROUND: Plastic scintillator detector (PSD) Exradin W1 has shown promising performance in small field dosimetry due to its water equivalence and small sensitive volume. However, few studies reported its capability in measuring fields of conventional sizes. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to assess the performance of W1 in measuring point dose of both conventional IMRT plans and VMAT SRS plans. METHODS: Forty-seven clinical plans (including 29 IMRT plans and 18 VMAT SRS plans with PTV volume less than 8 cm(3)) from our hospital were included in this study. W1 and Farmer-Type ionization chamber Exradin A19 were used in measuring IMRT plans, and W1 and microchamber Exradin A16 were used in measuring SRS plans. The agreement between the results of different types of detectors and TPS was evaluated. RESULTS: For IMRT plans, the average differences between measurements and TPS in high-dose regions were 0.27% ± 1.66% and 0.90% ± 1.78% (P = 0.056), and were −0.76% ± 1.47% and 0.37% ± 1.34% in low-dose regions (P = 0.000), for W1 and A19, respectively. For VMAT SRS plans, the average differences between measurements and TPS were −0.19% ± 0.96% and −0.59% ± 1.49% for W1 and A16 with no statistical difference (P = 0.231). CONCLUSION: W1 showed comparable performance with application-dedicated detectors in point dose measurements for both conventional IMRT and VMAT SRS techniques. It is a potential one-stop solution for general radiotherapy platforms that deliver both IMRT and SRS plans. SAGE Publications 2021-07-30 /pmc/articles/PMC8327019/ /pubmed/34328800 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15330338211036542 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Original Article
Huang, Zike
Qiao, Jian
Yang, Cui
Liu, Ming
Wang, Jiazhou
Han, Xu
Hu, Weigang
Quality Assurance for Small-Field VMAT SRS and Conventional-Field IMRT Using the Exradin W1 Scintillator
title Quality Assurance for Small-Field VMAT SRS and Conventional-Field IMRT Using the Exradin W1 Scintillator
title_full Quality Assurance for Small-Field VMAT SRS and Conventional-Field IMRT Using the Exradin W1 Scintillator
title_fullStr Quality Assurance for Small-Field VMAT SRS and Conventional-Field IMRT Using the Exradin W1 Scintillator
title_full_unstemmed Quality Assurance for Small-Field VMAT SRS and Conventional-Field IMRT Using the Exradin W1 Scintillator
title_short Quality Assurance for Small-Field VMAT SRS and Conventional-Field IMRT Using the Exradin W1 Scintillator
title_sort quality assurance for small-field vmat srs and conventional-field imrt using the exradin w1 scintillator
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8327019/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34328800
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15330338211036542
work_keys_str_mv AT huangzike qualityassuranceforsmallfieldvmatsrsandconventionalfieldimrtusingtheexradinw1scintillator
AT qiaojian qualityassuranceforsmallfieldvmatsrsandconventionalfieldimrtusingtheexradinw1scintillator
AT yangcui qualityassuranceforsmallfieldvmatsrsandconventionalfieldimrtusingtheexradinw1scintillator
AT liuming qualityassuranceforsmallfieldvmatsrsandconventionalfieldimrtusingtheexradinw1scintillator
AT wangjiazhou qualityassuranceforsmallfieldvmatsrsandconventionalfieldimrtusingtheexradinw1scintillator
AT hanxu qualityassuranceforsmallfieldvmatsrsandconventionalfieldimrtusingtheexradinw1scintillator
AT huweigang qualityassuranceforsmallfieldvmatsrsandconventionalfieldimrtusingtheexradinw1scintillator