Literature DB >> 16985274

Dose variations with varying calculation grid size in head and neck IMRT.

Heeteak Chung1, Hosang Jin, Jatinder Palta, Tae-Suk Suh, Siyong Kim.   

Abstract

Ever since the advent and development of treatment planning systems, the uncertainty associated with calculation grid size has been an issue. Even to this day, with highly sophisticated 3D conformal and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) treatment planning systems (TPS), dose uncertainty due to grid size is still a concern. A phantom simulating head and neck treatment was prepared from two semi-cylindrical solid water slabs and a radiochromic film was inserted between the two slabs for measurement. Plans were generated for a 5,400 cGy prescribed dose using Philips Pinnacle(3) TPS for two targets, one shallow ( approximately 0.5 cm depth) and one deep ( approximately 6 cm depth). Calculation grid sizes of 1.5, 2, 3 and 4 mm were considered. Three clinical cases were also evaluated. The dose differences for the varying grid sizes (2 mm, 3 mm and 4 mm from 1.5 mm) in the phantom study were 126 cGy (2.3% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription), 248.2 cGy (4.6% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription) and 301.8 cGy (5.6% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription), respectively for the shallow target case. It was found that the dose could be varied to about 100 cGy (1.9% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription), 148.9 cGy (2.8% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription) and 202.9 cGy (3.8% of the 5,400 cGy dose prescription) for 2 mm, 3 mm and 4 mm grid sizes, respectively, simply by shifting the calculation grid origin. Dose difference with a different range of the relative dose gradient was evaluated and we found that the relative dose difference increased with an increase in the range of the relative dose gradient. When comparing varying calculation grid sizes and measurements, the variation of the dose difference histogram was insignificant, but a local effect was observed in the dose difference map. Similar results were observed in the case of the deep target and the three clinical cases also showed results comparable to those from the phantom study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16985274     DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/51/19/008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Phys Med Biol        ISSN: 0031-9155            Impact factor:   3.609


  16 in total

1.  Assessment of dose reconstruction errors in image-guided radiation therapy.

Authors:  Hualiang Zhong; Elisabeth Weiss; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2008-01-11       Impact factor: 3.609

2.  Treatment Planning System Calculation Errors Are Present in Most Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core-Houston Phantom Failures.

Authors:  James R Kerns; Francesco Stingo; David S Followill; Rebecca M Howell; Adam Melancon; Stephen F Kry
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2017-04-04       Impact factor: 7.038

3.  Dose deformation-invariance in adaptive prostate radiation therapy: implication for treatment simulations.

Authors:  Manju Sharma; Elisabeth Weiss; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2012-11-29       Impact factor: 6.280

4.  Investigating the dosimetric effects of grid size on dose calculation accuracy using volumetric modulated arc therapy in spine stereotactic radiosurgery.

Authors:  Chin Snyder Karen; Manju Liu; Bo Zhao; Yimei Huang; Wen Ning; Indrin J Chetty; M Salim Siddiqui
Journal:  J Radiosurg SBRT       Date:  2017

5.  Optimal set of grid size and angular increment for practical dose calculation using the dynamic conformal arc technique: a systematic evaluation of the dosimetric effects in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy.

Authors:  Ji-Yeon Park; Siyong Kim; Hae-Jin Park; Jeong-Woo Lee; Yeon-Sil Kim; Tae-Suk Suh
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2014-01-04       Impact factor: 3.481

6.  Dose calculation of Acuros XB and Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm in lung stereotactic body radiotherapy treatment with flattening filter free beams and the potential role of calculation grid size.

Authors:  Baotian Huang; Lili Wu; Peixian Lin; Chuangzhen Chen
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2015-02-26       Impact factor: 3.481

7.  Feasibility of using two-dimensional array dosimeter for in vivo dose reconstruction via transit dosimetry.

Authors:  Heeteak Chung; Jonathan Li; Sanjiv Samant
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2011-04-08       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  Single fraction radiosurgery/stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for spine metastasis: A dosimetric comparison of multiple delivery platforms.

Authors:  Adrian Nalichowski; Isaac Kaufman; John Gallo; Todd Bossenberger; Tim Solberg; Ezequiel Ramirez; Yulong Yan; Julie Fredrick; Tewfik Bichay; Alan Mayville; Jay Burmeister
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-12-29       Impact factor: 2.102

9.  Impact of grid size on uniform scanning and IMPT plans in XiO treatment planning system for brain cancer.

Authors:  Suresh Rana; Yuanshui Zheng
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2015-09-08       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  Three-dimensional radiochromic film dosimetry for volumetric modulated arc therapy using a spiral water phantom.

Authors:  Masao Tanooka; Hiroshi Doi; Hideharu Miura; Hiroyuki Inoue; Yasue Niwa; Yasuhiro Takada; Masayuki Fujiwara; Toshiyuki Sakai; Kiyoshi Sakamoto; Norihiko Kamikonya; Shozo Hirota
Journal:  J Radiat Res       Date:  2013-05-17       Impact factor: 2.724

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.