| Literature DB >> 35468983 |
Jiwon Sung1, Yeonho Choi2, Jun Won Kim1, Ik Jae Lee1, Ho Lee3.
Abstract
This study evaluated the effect of the 1.5 T magnetic field of the magnetic resonance-guided linear accelerator (MR-Linac) on the radiation leakage doses penetrating the bunker radiation shielding wall. The evaluated 1.5 T MR-Linac Unity system has a bunker of the minimum recommended size. Unlike a conventional Linac, both primary beam transmission and secondary beam leakage were considered independently in the design and defined at the machine boundary away from the isocenter. Moreover, additional shielding was designed considering the numerous ducts between the treatment room and other rooms. The Linac shielding was evaluated by measuring the leakage doses at several locations. The intrinsic vibration and magnetic field were inspected at the proposed isocenter of the system. For verification, leakage doses were measured before and after applying the magnetic field. The intrinsic vibration and magnetic field readings were below the permitted limit. The leakage dose (0.05-12.2 µSv/week) also complied with internationally stipulated limits. The special shielding achieved a five-fold reduction in leakage dose. Applying the magnetic field increased the leakage dose by 0.12 to 4.56 µSv/week in several measurement points, although these values fall within experimental uncertainty. Thus, the effect of the magnetic field on the leakage dose could not be ascertained.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35468983 PMCID: PMC9038779 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-10498-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.996
Figure 1Magnitude of vibration according to (a) measurement time and (b) frequency.
Figure 2AC magnetic field measurement over 20 min.
Figure 3DC magnetic field measurement for 30 min.
Comparison between leakage doses before and after applying 1.5 T MR.
| Type | # | Photon | Neutron | Sum (Photon + Neutron) | Criteria (μSv/week) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before MR (μSv/week) | After MR (μSv/week) | Before MR (μSv/week) | After MR (μSv/week) | Before MR (μSv/week) | After MR (μSv/week) | |||
| *PR | ① | 0.116 | 0.052 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.116 | 0.052 | 100 |
| ⑥ | 0.115 | 0.075 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.115 | 0.075 | 20 | |
| *SR | ② | 11.940 | 8.298 | 0.290 | 0.000 | 12.230 | 8.298 | 100 |
| ③ | 0.427 | 0.544 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.427 | 0.544 | 100 | |
| ④ | 4.958 | 9.512 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 4.958 | 9.512 | 20 | |
| ⑤ | 1.579 | 1.214 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 1.579 | 1.214 | 20 | |
| ⑦ | 2.530 | 1.963 | 0.460 | 2.440 | 2.990 | 4.402 | 20 | |
The numbers indicate measurement positions shown in Fig. 6.
PR primary radiation, SR secondary radiation.
Figure 6Unity area layout including (a) measurement locations (red dots) and (b) distances between isocenter and shielding walls.
Figure 4Comparison (a) before and (b) after the special shielding design to reduce leakage dose around the ducts.
Figure 5Unity structure.
Parameter formulas for the primary and secondary beam.
| Primary barrier | Secondary barrier | |
|---|---|---|
| B | ||
| N | ||
| T |
Parameters and information for shielding walls according to each location.
| Type | Figure | P (μSv/week) | d (m) | W (Gy/week) | U | T | Shielding thickness | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Concrete (cm) | Lead (cm) | BPE(cm) | Equiv. concrete (cm) | |||||||
| PR | ① | 100 | 4.47 | 1700 | 0.22 | 0.2 | 79.0 | 15.0 | 0 | 180.8 |
| ⑥ | 20 | 3.91 | 1700 | 0.22 | 0.2 | 42.3 | 21.0 | 0 | 184.8 | |
| SR | ② | 100 | 4.52 | 8500 | 1 | 0.2 | 86.1 | 9.1 | 0 | 141.4 |
| ③ | 100 | 6.27 | 8500 | 1 | 0.125 | 0.0 | 22.0 | 10 | 133.7 | |
| ④ | 20 | 6.29 | 8500 | 1 | 1 | 120.0 | 5.0 | 0 | 150.4 | |
| ⑤ | 20 | 3.99 | 8500 | 1 | 0.2 | 45.2 | 19.3 | 0 | 162.5 | |
| ⑦ | 20 | 3.02 | 8500 | 1 | 0.05 | 50.0 | 13.0 | 0 | 129.0 | |
The numbers indicate measurement location shown in Fig. 6.
PR primary radiation,*SR secondary radiation.
Figure 7Location of vibration and magnetic field examination (red point).