Dear Authors,
If you believe that your paper was mistakenly rejected by other leading journals and you do not agree with final decision, the editors of Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy offer new fast track review. You may submit your manuscript to Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy together with all prior peer-reviews obtained from the other journal and your rebuttal letter. We guarantee review based decision within 72 hours from the time we will receive your manuscript.

Fast track submission process: Please submit the manuscript with all reviews and rebuttal letter by email to Dr. Michal Masternak (michal.masternak@ucf.edu) for fast review processing. To assure immediate attention the email title must to include: RPOR-fast track- Last Name First Name (of corresponding author).

Volume 17, Number 3, 2012

Comparison of individual and composite field analysis using array detector for Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy dose verification

Sathiyan Saminathan, Varatharaj Chandraraj, C.H. Sridhar, Ravikumar Manickam

Summary:

Aim

To compare the measured and calculated individual and composite field planar dose distribution of Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy plans.

Materials and methods

The measurements were performed in Clinac DHX linear accelerator with 6 MV photons using Matrixx device and a solid water phantom. The 20 brain tumor patients were selected for this study. The IMRT plan was carried out for all the patients using Eclipse treatment planning system. The verification plan was produced for every original plan using CT scan of Matrixx embedded in the phantom. Every verification field was measured by the Matrixx. The TPS calculated and measured dose distributions were compared for individual and composite fields.

Results and discussion

The percentage of gamma pixel match for the dose distribution patterns were evaluated using gamma histogram. The gamma pixel match was 95–98% for 41 fields (39%) and 98% for 59 fields (61%) with individual fields. The percentage of gamma pixel match was 95–98% for 5 patients and 98% for other 12 patients with composite fields. Three patients showed a gamma pixel match of less than 95%. The comparison of percentage gamma pixel match for individual and composite fields showed more than 2.5% variation for 6 patients, more than 1% variation for 4 patients, while the remaining 10 patients showed less than 1% variation.

Conclusion

The individual and composite field measurements showed good agreement with TPS calculated dose distribution for the studied patients. The measurement and data analysis for individual fields is a time consuming process, the composite field analysis may be sufficient enough for smaller field dose distribution analysis with array detectors.

Signature: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, 2012; 17(3) : 157-162


« back

 
INDEXED IN:

Indexed in: EMBASE®, the Excerpta Medica database, the Elsevier BIOBASE (Current Awareness in Biological Sciences) and in the Index Copernicus.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/15071367/19/2