The Dosimetric Comparison between Measured Tissue Maximum Ratio Directly by Water Phantom and That Calculated from Percentage Depth Dose Measurments in Small Field and Determind the Differnces between Two Methods

Document Type : Original Paper

Authors

1 Physics Unit-Radiation Oncology, Children’s Cancer Hospital, Cairo, Egypt

2 Department of Radiotherapy & Nuclear Medicine, National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt

Abstract

Introduction: The aim is to observe that the measurement of tissue maximum ratio (TMR) by water phantom directly differs from the calculation of TMR from percentage depth dose (PDD) or not.
Material and Methods: The linear accelerator Siemens (6 MV & 10MV) with 82 leaves (MLC)-based stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT). The water phantom (PTW) was used for measuring the dosimetric parameter of TMR &%DD. This data was calculated using 0.125 cc simeflex ionization chamber. The small fields have different sizes ranging from 12.50 to 40.00 mm in diameter.
Results: There were small observations of mean error ≤ 1.50 % for all collecting data related to depths and field sizes.  The Statistical Package of Social Science (SPSS) (version 26) to generate results. Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Test was used to compare two groups; (p ≤ 0.05) was considered significant. There were no significant differences between TMR data. The measured TMR data calculated from %DD had a strong positive correlation for cone sizes from 1.0 cm x1.0 cm to 10.0 cm x10.0cm.
Conclusion: It has been shown that the calculation of TMR data from PDD agrees with the measuring values directly, and it is accepted for use in treatment.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Bjärngard BE, Tsai JS, Rice RK. Doses on the central axes of narrow 6‐MV x‐ray beams. Medical physics. 1990 Sep;17(5):794-9.
  2. Ding GX, Krauss R. An empirical formula to obtain tissue-phantom ratios from percentage depth–dose curves for small fields. Physics in Medicine & Biology. 2013 Jun 20;58(14):4781.
  3. Attalla EM, Sallam AM, Ibrahim IH, Elawady RA. A Quality Assurance Procedure to Monitor Mechanical Stability On-Linear Accelerator-based on Stereotactic radiosurgery/stereotactic radiotherapy. Egyptian Journal of Biophysics and Biomedical Engineering. 2008:11-23.
  4. Burns JE. BJR Supplement 25: Central Axis Depth Dose Data for Use in Radiotherapy. London, England: British Institute of Radiology; 1996.
  5. Purdy JA. Relationship between tissue–phantom ratio and percentage depth dose. Medical physics. 1977 Jan;4(1):66-7.
  6. JP KF. Khan’s the physics of radiation therapy. Philadelphia, LWW. 2014.
  7. Storchi P, Van Gasteren JJ. A table of phantom scatter factors of photon beams as a function of the quality index and field size. Physics in Medicine & Biology. 1996 Mar;41(3):563.
  8. Haider TK, El‐Khatib EE. Measurements of phantom scatter factors for small field sizes in high energy x rays. Medical physics. 1994 May;21(5):663-6..
  9. Van Gasteren JJ, Heukelom S, Van Kleffens HJ, Van der Laarse R, Venselaar JL, Westermann CF. The determination of phantom and collimator scatter components of the output of megavoltage photon beams: measurement of the collimator scatter part with a beam-coaxial narrow cylindrical phantom. Radiotherapy and Oncology. 1991 Apr 1;20(4):250-7.
  10. Parwaie W, Refahi S, Ardekani MA, Farhood B. Different dosimeters/detectors used in small-field dosimetry: Pros and cons. Journal of medical signals and sensors. 2018 Jul;8(3):195.
  11. Ceberg CP, Bjärngard BE, Zhu TC. Experimental determination of the dose kernel in high‐energy x‐ray beams. Medical physics. 1996 Apr;23(4):505-11.
  12. Van Battum LJ, Essers M, Storchi PR. Conversion of measured percentage depth dose to tissue maximum ratio values in stereotactic radiotherapy. Physics in Medicine & Biology. 2002 Sep 5;47(18):3289.
  13. Cheng CW, Hyun Cho S, Taylor M, Das IJ. Determination of zero‐field size percent depth doses and tissue maximum ratios for stereotactic radiosurgery and IMRT dosimetry: Comparison between experimental measurements and Monte Carlo simulation. Medical physics. 2007 Aug;34(8):3149-57.
  14. Richmond N, Brackenridge R. A comparison of small-field tissue phantom ratio data generation methods for an Elekta Agility 6 MV photon beam. Medical Dosimetry. 2014 Mar 1;39(1):60-3.
  15. Li XA, Soubra M, Szanto J, Gerig LH. Lateral electron equilibrium and electron contamination in measurements of head‐scatter factors using miniphantoms and brass caps. Medical physics. 1995 Jul;22(7):1167-70.
  16. Narayanasamy G, Cruz W, Papanikolaou N, Stathakis S. Comparison between measured tissue phantom ratio values and calculated from percent depth doses with and without peak scatter correction factor in a 6 MV beam. Int. J Cancer Ther Oncol. 2015;3(2):1-5.
  17. American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM. Dosimetry of Small Static Fields Used in External Beam Radiotherapy. An International Code of Practice for Reference and Relative Dose Determination.
  18. Laub WU, Wong T. The volume effect of detectors in the dosimetry of small fields used in IMRT. Medical physics. 2003 Mar;30(3):341-7.
  19. Thomadsen BR, Kubsad SS, Paliwal BR, Shahabi S, Mackie TR. On the cause of the variation in tissue‐maximum ratio values with source‐to‐detector distance. Medical physics. 1993 May;20(3):723-7.
  20. Knutson NC, Schmidt MC, Belley MD, Nguyen NB, Li HH, Sajo E, Price MJ. Direct measurement of continuous TMR data with a 1D tank and automated couch movements. Medical physics. 2017 Jul;44(7):3861-5.
  21. Lam KL, Ten Haken RK. In phantom determination of collimator scatter factor. Medical physics. 1996 Jul;23(7):1207-12
  22. Rahman MA, Alam MJ. Analysis of Tissue Phantom Ratio of the Megavoltage Photon Beams. Malaysian Journal of Medical and Biological Research. 2018 Dec 31;5(2):61-8.
  23. Atiq A, Atiq M, Buzdar SA. Computational Tool for Calculation of Tissue Air Ratio and Tissue Maximum Ratio in Radiation Dosimetry.

 

Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
Volume 18, Issue 6
November and December 2021
Pages 384-388

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 18 April 2020
  • Revise Date: 24 October 2020
  • Accept Date: 10 November 2020

Share

How to cite

Statistics