KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Türk Onkoloji Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 1

Dosimetric Accuracy of an HDR Brachytherapy Treatment Planning System for Different Irradiation Lengths with Monte Carlo Simulation

Ahmet BOZKURT
Gönül KEMİKLER
Hediye ACUN BUCHT
Sayfa
36–44
Yayın Tarihi
2022-11-04
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Thedeviation between the calculated dose rate values slightly increases as the distance from the source center increases >5 cm from the source, and its quantity depends on the number of dwell positions.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:OBJECTIVEThe purpose of the present study was to verify calculated dose rate profiles of Ir-192 for four differentirradiation lengths and various numbers of dwell positions by using treatment planning system (TPS)calculations and Monte Carlo (MC) simulations.METHODSDose rate profiles per air-kerma strength in μGy m2/h (abbreviated as U) were calculated on transverseaxis for irradiation lengths of 2, 3, 4, and 5 cm by Nucletron Oncentra TPS.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The MC and TPS calculateddose rate profiles were compared for all settings.RESULTSThe difference between the calculated dose rate profiles by MC and TPS was found within 2% at aninterval of 2 mm–8 cm away from the source for all irradiation lengths.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Thedeviation between the calculated dose rate values slightly increases as the distance from the source center increases >5 cm from the source, and its quantity depends on the number of dwell positions.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

OBJECTIVEThe purpose of the present study was to verify calculated dose rate profiles of Ir-192 for four differentirradiation lengths and various numbers of dwell positions by using treatment planning system (TPS)calculations and Monte Carlo (MC) simulations.METHODSDose rate profiles per air-kerma strength in μGy m2/h (abbreviated as U) were calculated on transverseaxis for irradiation lengths of 2, 3, 4, and 5 cm by Nucletron Oncentra TPS. The same irradiation scenarios were simulated with Monte Carlo N-Particle (MCNP) Transport Code. The MC and TPS calculateddose rate profiles were compared for all settings.RESULTSThe difference between the calculated dose rate profiles by MC and TPS was found within 2% at aninterval of 2 mm–8 cm away from the source for all irradiation lengths. The largest discrepancy of 5.2%was computed at a distance of 10 cm from the source for 5 cm irradiation length.CONCLUSIONThere is a good consistency between the calculated dose rate profiles by MCNP and Oncentra TPS. Thedeviation between the calculated dose rate values slightly increases as the distance from the source center increases >5 cm from the source, and its quantity depends on the number of dwell positions.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

BOZKURT, A., KEMİKLER, G., BUCHT, H. A. (2022). Dosimetric Accuracy of an HDR Brachytherapy Treatment Planning System for Different Irradiation Lengths with Monte Carlo Simulation. Türk Onkoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 34 - Sayı: 1, 36–44. https://ajindex.com/articles/639226

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (9)

  1. Suntharalingam N, Podgorsak EB, Tölli H. Brachytherapy: Physical and Clinical Aspects. In: Podgorsak EB, Editor. Radiation Oncology Physics: A Handbook for Teachers and Students. Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 2005. p. 454
  2. Angelopoulos A, Baras P, Sakelliou L, Karaiskos P, Sandilos P. Monte Carlo dosimetry of a new 192Ir high dose rate brachytherapy source. Med Phys 2000;27(11):2521–7
  3. Strohmmaier S, Zwierzchowski G. Comparison of 60Co and 192Ir sources ın HDR brachytherapy. J Contemp Brachytherapy 2011;3(4):199–208
  4. Rivard MJ, Venselaar JLM, Beaulieu L. The evolution of brachytherapy treatment planning. Med Phys 2009;36(6):2136–53
  5. Rivard MJ, Coursey BM, DeWerd LA, Hanson WF, Hug MS, Ibbott GS, et al. Update of AAPM Task Group No. 43 Report: A revised AAPM protocol for brachytherapy dose calculations. Med Phys 2004;31(3):633–74
  6. Perez-Calatayud J, Ballester F, Serrano-Andres MA, Puchades V, Lluch JL, Limami Y, et al. Dosimetry characteristics of the Plus and 12i GammaMed PDR 192 Ir sources. Med Phys 2001;28(12):2576–85
  7. Medich DC, Munro JJ 3rd. Monte Carlo characterization of the M-19 high dose rate Iridium-192 brachytherapy source. Med Phys 2007;34(6):1999–2006
  8. Perez-Calatayud J, Cabanero DG, Ballaster FB. Monte Carlo Application in Brachytherapy Dosimetry. In: Lemoigne Y, Caner A, editors. Radiotherapy and Brachytherapy. Netherlands: Springer; 2009. p. 239– 40
  9. De Boeck L, Belien J, Egyed W. Dose optimization in high-dose-rate brachytherapy: A literature review of quantitative models from 1990 to 2010. Oper Res Health Care 2014;3(2):80–90. 10.Giannouli S, Baltas D, Milickovic N, Lahanas M, Kolotas C, Zamboglou Z, et al. Autoactivation of source dwell positions for HDR brachytherapy treatment planning. Med Phys 2000;27(11):2517–20. 11.Mowlavi AA, Cupardo F, Severgnini M. Monte Carlo and experimental relative dose determination for an Iridium-192 source in water phantom. Iran J Radiat Res 2008;6(1):37–42. 12.Lymperopoulou G, Pantelis E, Papagiannis P, RozakiMavrouli H, Sakelliou L, Baltas D, et al. A Monte Carlo dosimetry study of vaginal 192Ir brachytherapy applications with a shielded cylindrical applicator set. Med Phys 2004;31(11):3080–6. 13.Mosleh Shirazi MA, Faghihi R, Siavashpour Z, Nedaie HA, Mehdizadeh S, Sina S. Independent evaluation of an in-house brachytherapy treatment planning system using simulation, measurement and calculation methods. J Appl Clin Med Phys 2012;13(2):3687. 14.Naseri A, Mesbahi A.