Mikoto Tamura1, Hajime Monzen2, Kenji Matsumoto1, Masahiko Okumura3, Hiroshi Doi4, Yasumasa Nishimura4. 1. Department of Medical Physics, Graduate School of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, Kindai University, Osaka-Sayama, Japan. 2. Department of Medical Physics, Graduate School of Medical Science, Faculty of Medicine, Kindai University, Osaka-Sayama, Japan hmon@med.kindai.ac.jp. 3. Department of Central Radiology, Kindai University Hospital, Osaka-Sayama, Japan. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Faculty of Medicine, Kindai University, Osaka-Sayama, Japan.
Abstract
AIM: In this study, we clarified changes of the surface dose to a low-density material on a carbon couch and verified whether a novel rigid couch (HM couch) could reduce the surface dose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We measured the surface dose using only a carbon couch (iBeam Couchtop STANDARD; BrainLab), a low-density material (Styrofoam board) on the carbon couch, and an HM couch for 6 and 10 MV photon beams. RESULTS: A 5-cm styrofoam board placed on the carbon couch reduced the surface dose by approximately 7-9%, while it had no impact on the depth dose profile; however, in use, such a thickness may cause collision of the patient with the gantry head. The HM couch reduced the surface dose by approximately 7-9% and shifted the depth dose profile by approximately 0.4 cm in the depth direction compared to the carbon couch. CONCLUSION: The HM couch has the potential to reduce skin toxicity and is expected to be useful in clinical practice instead of carbon couches. Copyright
AIM: In this study, we clarified changes of the surface dose to a low-density material on a carbon couch and verified whether a novel rigid couch (HM couch) could reduce the surface dose. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We measured the surface dose using only a carbon couch (iBeam Couchtop STANDARD; BrainLab), a low-density material (Styrofoam board) on the carbon couch, and an HM couch for 6 and 10 MV photon beams. RESULTS: A 5-cm styrofoam board placed on the carbon couch reduced the surface dose by approximately 7-9%, while it had no impact on the depth dose profile; however, in use, such a thickness may cause collision of the patient with the gantry head. The HM couch reduced the surface dose by approximately 7-9% and shifted the depth dose profile by approximately 0.4 cm in the depth direction compared to the carbon couch. CONCLUSION: The HM couch has the potential to reduce skin toxicity and is expected to be useful in clinical practice instead of carbon couches. Copyright
Authors: Bradford S Hoppe; Benjamin Laser; Alex V Kowalski; Sandra C Fontenla; Elizabeth Pena-Greenberg; Ellen D Yorke; D Michael Lovelock; Margie A Hunt; Kenneth E Rosenzweig Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038