Literature DB >> 11339755

Comparison of the Batho, ETAR and Monte Carlo dose calculation methods in CT based patient models.

F C du Plessis1, C A Willemse, M G Lötter, L Goedhals.   

Abstract

This paper shows the contribution that Monte Carlo methods make in regard to dose distribution calculations in CT based patient models and the role it plays as a gold standard to evaluate other dose calculation algorithms. The EGS4 based BEAM code was used to construct a generic 8 MV accelerator to obtain a series of x-ray field sources. These were used in the EGS4 based DOSXYZ code to generate beam data in a mathematical water phantom to set up a beam model in a commercial treatment planning system (TPS), CADPLAN V.2.7.9. Dose distributions were calculated with the Batho and ETAR inhomogeneity correction algorithms in head/sinus, lung, and prostate patient models for 2 x 2, 5 x 5, and 10 X 10 cm2 open x-ray beams. Corresponding dose distributions were calculated with DOSXYZ that were used as a benchmark. The dose comparisons are expressed in terms of 2D isodose distributions, percentage depth dose data, and dose difference volume histograms (DDVH's). Results indicated that the Batho and ETAR methods contained inaccuracies of 20%-70% in the maxillary sinus region in the head model. Large lung inhomogeneities irradiated with small fields gave rise to absorbed dose deviations of 10%-20%. It is shown for a 10 x 10 cm2 field that DOSXYZ models lateral scatter in lung that is not present in the Batho and ETAR methods. The ETAR and Batho methods are accurate within 3% in a prostate model. We showed how the performance of these inhomogeneity correction methods can be understood in realistic patient models using validated Monte Carlo codes such as BEAM and DOSXYZ.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11339755     DOI: 10.1118/1.1357223

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  8 in total

1.  Monte Carlo dose calculations for a 6-MV photon beam in a thorax phantom.

Authors:  Alireza Farajollahi; Asghar Mesbahi
Journal:  Radiat Med       Date:  2006-05

2.  Evaluation of dose prediction errors and optimization convergence errors of deliverable-based head-and-neck IMRT plans computed with a superposition/convolution dose algorithm.

Authors:  I B Mihaylov; J V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Dose prediction accuracy of anisotropic analytical algorithm and pencil beam convolution algorithm beyond high density heterogeneity interface.

Authors:  Suresh B Rana
Journal:  South Asian J Cancer       Date:  2013-01

4.  The use of radiochromic EBT2 film for the quality assurance and dosimetric verification of 3D conformal radiotherapy using Microtek ScanMaker 9800XL flatbed scanner.

Authors:  G S Sim; J H D Wong; K H Ng
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2013-07-08       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  Influence of electron density spatial distribution and X-ray beam quality during CT simulation on dose calculation accuracy.

Authors:  Ahmad Nobah; Belal Moftah; Nada Tomic; Slobodan Devic
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2011-04-06       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Evaluation of AAA and XVMC Algorithms for Dose Calculation in Lung Equivalent Heterogeneity in Photon Fields: A Comparison of Calculated Results with Measurements.

Authors:  N Singh; N K Painuly; L N Chaudhari; A Chairmadurai; T Verma; D Shrotiya; C P Bhatt
Journal:  J Biomed Phys Eng       Date:  2018-09-01

7.  An inhomogeneity correction algorithm for irregular fields of high-energy photon beams based on Clarkson integration and the 3D beam subtraction method.

Authors:  Sotirios Stathakis; Constantin Kappas; Kiki Theodorou; Nikos Papanikolaou; Jean-Claude Rosenwald
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2006-02-15       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Influence of internal fixation systems on radiation therapy for spinal tumor.

Authors:  Jingfeng Li; Lei Yan; Jianping Wang; Lin Cai; Dongcai Hu
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-07-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.