Literature DB >> 11991132

Dose to radiation therapists from activation at high-energy accelerators used for conventional and intensity-modulated radiation therapy.

J Alan Rawlinson1, Mohammad K Islam, Duncan M Galbraith.   

Abstract

The increased beam-on times which characterize intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) could lead to an increase in the dose received by radiation therapists due to induced activity. To examine this, gamma ray spectrometry was used to identify the major isotopes responsible for activation at a representative location in the treatment room of an 18 MV accelerator (Varian Clinac 21EX). These were found to be 28Al, 56Mn, and 24Na. The decay of the dose rate measured at this location following irradiation was analyzed in terms of the known half-lives to yield saturation dose rates of 9.6, 12.4, and 6.2 microSv/h, respectively. A formalism was developed to estimate activation dose (microSv/week) due to successive patient irradiation cycles, characterized by the number of 18 MV fractions per week, F, the number of MU per fraction, M, the in-room time between fractions, td (min), and the treatment delivery time t'r (min). The results are represented by the sum of two formulas, one for the dose from 28Al 1.8 x 10(-3) F M (1-e(-03t'(r))/t'r and one for the dose from the other isotopes approximately 1.1 x 10(-6) F(1.7) Mt(d). For conventional therapy doses are about 60 microSv/week for an 18 MV workload of 60,000 MU/week. Irradiation for QA purposes can significantly increase the dose. For IMRT as currently practiced, lengthy treatment delivery times limit the number of fractions that can be delivered per week and hence limit the dose to values similar to those in conventional therapy. However for an IMRT regime designed to maximize patient throughput, doses up to 330 microSv/week could be expected. To reduce dose it is recommended that IMRT treatments should be delivered at energies lower than 18 MV, that in multienergy IMRT, high-energy treatments should be scheduled in the latter part of the day, and that equipment manufacturers should strive to minimize activation in the design of high-energy accelerators.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11991132     DOI: 10.1118/1.1463063

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


  8 in total

1.  Nationwide survey on the operational status of electron accelerators for radiation therapy in Japan.

Authors:  Ichiro Yamaguchi; Shinji Tanaka; Toshioh Fujibuchi; Tetsuo Kida; Hiroaki Nagaoka; Hiroshi Watanabe
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2010-01-22

2.  Applicability of self-activation of an NaI scintillator for measurement of photo-neutrons around a high-energy X-ray radiotherapy machine.

Authors:  Genichiro Wakabayashi; Akihiro Nohtomi; Eriko Yahiro; Toshioh Fujibuchi; Junichi Fukunaga; Yoshiyuki Umezu; Yasuhiko Nakamura; Katsumasa Nakamura; Makoto Hosono; Tetsuo Itoh
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2014-11-18

3.  Secondary radiation dose during high-energy total body irradiation.

Authors:  M Janiszewska; K Polaczek-Grelik; M Raczkowski; B Szafron; A Konefał; W Zipper
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2014-03-06       Impact factor: 3.621

4.  Cephalometric assessment of the axial inclination of upper and lower incisors in relation to the third-order angle.

Authors:  Michael Knösel; Rengin Attin; Dietmar Kubein-Meesenburg; Reza Sadat-Khonsari
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 1.938

5.  Radiation burden of assistant medical technicians at a medical accelerator.

Authors:  M Gründel; F Güthoff
Journal:  J Med Phys       Date:  2008-10

6.  Evaluation of equivalent dose from neutrons and activation products from a 15-MV X-ray LINAC.

Authors:  Isra Israngkul-Na-Ayuthaya; Sivalee Suriyapee; Phongpheath Pengvanich
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2015-08-11       Impact factor: 2.724

7.  Compensators: an alternative IMRT delivery technique.

Authors:  Sha X Chang; Timothy J Cullip; Katharin M Deschesne; Elizabeth P Miller; Julian G Rosenman
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2004-07-01       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Dosimetric characteristics of a cubic-block-piled compensator for intensity-modulated radiation therapy in the Pinnacle radiotherapy treatment planning system.

Authors:  Koji Sasaki; Yasunori Obata
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2006-06-16       Impact factor: 2.102

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.