Literature DB >> 11444523

Dose verification for patients undergoing IMRT.

J Y Ting1, L W Davis.   

Abstract

At Emory Clinic intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) was started by using dynamic multileaf collimators (dMLC) as electronic tissue compensators in August 1998. Our IMRT program evolved with the inclusion of a commercially available inverse treatment planning system in September 1999. While the introduction of electronic tissue compensators into clinical use did not affect the customary radiation oncology practice, inverse treatment planning does alter our basic routines. Basic concepts of radiation therapy port designs for inverse treatment planning are different from conventional or 3D conformal treatments. With inverse treatment planning, clinicians are required to outline a gross tumor volume (GTV), a clinical target volume (CTV), critical normal structures, and to design a planning target volume (PTV). Clinicians do not designate the volume to be shielded. Because each IMRT radiation portal is composed of many beamlets with varying intensities, methods and practice used to verify delivered dose from IMRT portals are also different from conventional treatment portals. Often, the validity of measured data is in doubt. Therefore, checking treatment planning computer output with measurements are confusing and fruitless, at times. Commissioning an IMRT program and routine patient dose verification of IMRT require films and ionization chamber measurements in phantom. Additional specialized physics instrumentation is not required other than those available in a typical radiation oncology facility. At this time, we consider that routine quality assurance prior to patient treatments is necessary.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11444523     DOI: 10.1016/s0958-3947(01)00059-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Dosim        ISSN: 1873-4022            Impact factor:   1.482


  7 in total

1.  Simulation for improvement of system sensitivity of radiochromic film dosimetry with different band-pass filters and scanner light intensities.

Authors:  Takeshi Kamomae; Yuki Miyabe; Akira Sawada; Osamu Matoba; Manabu Nakata; Shinsuke Yano; Toru Takakura; Takashi Mizowaki; Akio Itoh; Masahiro Hiraoka
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2011-03-17

2.  Dosimetric verification of compensated beams using radiographic film.

Authors:  Slaven Jurkovic; Gordana Zauhar; Dario Faj; Deni Smilovic Radojcic; Manda Svabic; Mladen Kasabasic; Ana Diklic
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2011-07-20       Impact factor: 2.991

3.  Statistical analysis of IMRT dosimetry quality assurance measurements for local delivery guideline.

Authors:  Jin Beom Chung; Jae Sung Kim; Sung Whan Ha; Sung-Joon Ye
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2011-03-28       Impact factor: 3.481

4.  Evaluation of PTW Seven29 for tomotherapy patient-specific quality assurance and comparison with ScandiDos Delta(4).

Authors:  Pamela Myers; Sotirios Stathakis; Alonso N Gutiérrez; Carlos Esquivel; Panayiotis Mavroidis; Niko Papanikolaou
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2012-04

5.  Evaluation and Validation of IBA I'MatriXX Array for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance of TomoTherapy®.

Authors:  N V N Madhusudhana Sresty; A Krishnam Raju; B Nagarjuna Reddy; V C Sahithya; Yakub Mohmd; G Deleep Kumar; T Anil Kumar; Tasneem Rushdi; S Aparna; G Durga Prasad; Harjot Kaur Bajwa
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2019 Jul-Sep

6.  Comparison of dose calculated by an intensity modulated radiotherapy treatment planning system and an independent monitor unit verification program.

Authors:  J J Haslam; D V Bonta; A E Lujan; C Rash; W Jackson; J C Roeske
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.102

7.  Commissioning results of an automated treatment planning verification system.

Authors:  Christopher L Nelson; Bryan E Mason; Ronald C Robinson; Kelly D Kisling; Steven M Kirsner
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-09-08       Impact factor: 2.102

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.