Literature DB >> 17985627

Off-axis dose response characteristics of an amorphous silicon electronic portal imaging device.

Peter B Greer1.   

Abstract

Amorphous silicon (a-Si) electronic portal imaging devices (EPIDs) have typically been calibrated to dose at central axis (CAX). Division of acquired images by the flood-field (FF) image that corrects for pixel sensitivity variation as well as open field energy-dependent off-axis response variation should result in a flat EPID response over the entire matrix for the same field size. While the beam profile can be reintroduced to the image by an additional correction matrix, the CAX EPID response to dose calibration factor is assumed to apply to all pixels in the detector. The aim of this work was to investigate the dose response of the Varian aS500 amorphous silicon detector across the entire detector area. First it was established that the EPID response across the panel became stable (within approximately 0.2%) for MU settings greater than approximately 200 MU. The EPID was then FF calibrated with a high MU setting of approximately 400 for all subsequent experiments. Whole detector images with varying MU settings from 2-500 were then acquired for two dose rates (300 and 600 MU/min) for 6 MV photons for two EPIDs. The FF corrected EPID response was approximately flat or uniform across the detector for greater than 100 MU delivered (within 0.5%). However, the off-axis EPID response was greater than the CAX response for small MU irradiations, giving a raised EPID profile. Up to 5% increase in response at 20 cm off-axis compared to CAX was found for very small MU settings for one EPID, while it was within 2% for the second (newer) EPID. Off-axis response nonuniformities attributed to detector damage were also found for the older EPID. Similar results were obtained with the EPID at 18 MV energy and operating in asynchronous mode (acquisition not synchronized with beam pulses), however the profiles were flatter and more irregular for the small MU irradiations. By moving the detector laterally and repeating the experiments, the increase in response off-axis was found to depend on the pixel position relative to the beam CAX. When the beam was heavily filtered by a phantom the off-axis response variation was reduced markedly to within 0.5% for all MU settings. Independent measurements of off-axis point doses with ion chamber did not show any change in off-axis factor with MUs. Measurements of beam quality (TMR20-10) for MU settings of 2, 5, and 100 at central axis and at 15 cm off-axis could not explain the effect. The response change is unlikely to be significant for clinical IMRT verification with this imaging/acclerator system where MUs are of the order of 100-300, provided the detector does not exhibit radiation damage artifacts.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17985627     DOI: 10.1118/1.2779944

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


  11 in total

1.  A study on dosimetric properties of electronic portal imaging device and its use as a quality assurance tool in Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy.

Authors:  Prabakar Sukumar; Sriram Padmanaban; Prakash Jeevanandam; S A Syam Kumar; Vivekanandan Nagarajan
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2011-08-26

2.  Monte Carlo-based adaptive EPID dose kernel accounting for different field size responses of imagers.

Authors:  Song Wang; Joseph K Gardner; John J Gordon; Weidong Li; Luke Clews; Peter B Greer; Jeffrey V Siebers
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Simple proposal for dosimetry with an Elekta iViewGT™ electronic portal imaging device (EPID) using commercial software modules.

Authors:  Janett Liebich; Jörg Licher; Christian Scherf; Eugen Kara; Nadine Koch; Claus Rödel; Ulla Ramm
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 3.621

4.  Testing the portal imager GLAaS algorithm for machine quality assurance.

Authors:  G Nicolini; E Vanetti; A Clivio; A Fogliata; G Boka; L Cozzi
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2008-05-21       Impact factor: 3.481

5.  EPID dosimetry for pretreatment quality assurance with two commercial systems.

Authors:  Daniel W Bailey; Lalith Kumaraswamy; Mohammad Bakhtiari; Harish K Malhotra; Matthew B Podgorsak
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2012-07-05       Impact factor: 2.102

6.  Intensity-modulated radiation therapy dose verification using fluence and portal imaging device.

Authors:  Iori Sumida; Hajime Yamaguchi; Indra J Das; Hisao Kizaki; Keiko Aboshi; Mari Tsujii; Yuji Yamada; Osamu Suzuki; Yuji Seo; Fumiaki Isohashi; Kazuhiko Ogawa
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2016-01-08       Impact factor: 2.102

7.  Optimized Varian aSi portal dosimetry: development of datasets for collective use.

Authors:  Ann Van Esch; Dominique P Huyskens; Lukas Hirschi; Christof Baltes
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2013-11-04       Impact factor: 2.102

8.  The GLAaS algorithm for portal dosimetry and quality assurance of RapidArc, an intensity modulated rotational therapy.

Authors:  Giorgia Nicolini; Eugenio Vanetti; Alessandro Clivio; Antonella Fogliata; Stine Korreman; Jiri Bocanek; Luca Cozzi
Journal:  Radiat Oncol       Date:  2008-09-09       Impact factor: 3.481

9.  Dose calibration of EPIDs for segmented IMRT dosimetry.

Authors:  Shrikant Deshpande; Aitang Xing; Lois Holloway; Peter Metcalfe; Philip Vial
Journal:  J Appl Clin Med Phys       Date:  2014-11-08       Impact factor: 2.102

10.  An Empirical Transmitted EPID Dosimetry Method using a Back-Projection Algorithm.

Authors:  Hashemi S M; Bahreyni M H; Mohammadi M; Nasseri S; Bayani S; Gholamhosseinian H; Salek R; Shahedi F; Momennezhad M
Journal:  J Biomed Phys Eng       Date:  2019-10-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.