scholarly journals The Commissioning and Validation of EclipseTM Treatment Planning System on a Varian VitalBeamTM Medical Linear Accelerator for Photon and Electron Beams

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samira Yazdani ◽  
Fateme Shirani Takabi ◽  
Abolfazl Nickfarjam
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Linear Accelerator ◽  
Electron Beams ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System ◽  
Patient Treatment ◽  
Depth Dose ◽  
Tps Commissioning ◽  
Calculated Dose ◽  
Output Factors

Purpose: Commissioning of a linear accelerator is a process of acquiring a set of data used for patient treatment. This article presents the beam data measurement results from the commissioning of a VitalBeamTM linac. Materials and Methods: Dosimetric properties for 6,10, and 15 MV photon beams and 6, 9, 12, and 16 MeV electron beams have been performed. Parameters, including Percentage Depth Dose (PDD), depth dose profile, symmetry, flatness, quality index, output factors, and the vital data for Treatment Planning System (TPS) commissioning were measured. The imported data were checked by CIRS phantom accordingly to IAEA TRS-430, TECDOC. Eight different positions of CIRS phantom CT were planned and treated. Finally, the calculated dose at a determined position was compared with measuring data to TPS validation. Results: After comparing 84 points in a different plan, the 83 points were in agreement with the criteria, and just for one point in 15 MV failed. Conclusion: Commissioning of dose and field flatness and symmetry are in tolerance intervals given by Varian. This proves that the studied lines meet the specification and can be used in clinical practice with all available electron and photon energies.

Clinical use of a commercial Monte Carlo treatment planning system for electron beams

2005 ◽  
Vol 50 (5) ◽  
pp. 1029-1034 ◽  
Author(s):  
J E Cygler ◽  
C Lochrin ◽  
G M Daskalov ◽  
M Howard ◽  
R Zohr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Electron Beams ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System ◽  
Clinical Use

Quality assurance of volumetric-modulated arc therapy head and neck cancer treatment using PRESAGE® dosimeter

2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 441-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jalil ur Rehman ◽  
Muhammad Isa ◽  
Nisar Ahmad ◽  
H. M. Noor ul Huda Khan Asghar ◽  
Zaheer A. Gilani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System ◽  
Ct Scans ◽  
Arc Therapy ◽  
Calculated Dose

AbstractBackgroundAccurate three-dimensional dosimetry is essential in modern radiotherapy techniques such as volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). In this research work, the PRESAGE® dosimeter was used as quality assurance (QA) tool for VMAT planning for head and neck (H&N) cancer.Material and methodComputer tomography (CT) scans of an Image Radiation Oncology Core (IROC) H&N anthropomorphic phantom with both IROC standard insert and PRESAGE® insert were acquired separately. Both CT scans were imported into the Pinnacle (9.4 version) TPS for treatment planning, where the structures [planning target volume (PTV), organs at risk) and thermoluminescent detectors (TLDs) were manually contoured and used to optimise a VMAT plan. Treatment planning was done using VMAT (dual arc: 182°–178°, 178°–182°). Beam profile comparisons and gamma analysis were used to quantify agreement with film, PRESAGE® measurement and treatment planning system (TPS) calculated dose distribution.ResultsThe average ratio of TLD measured to calculated doses at the four PTV locations in the H&N phantom were between 0·95 to 0·99 for all three VMAT deliveries. Dose profiles were taken along the left–right, the anterior–posterior and superior–inferior axes, and good agreement was found between the PRESAGE® and Pinnacle profile. The mean value of gamma results for three VMAT deliveries in axial and sagittal planes were found to be 94·24 and 93·16% when compared with film and Pinnacle, respectively. The average values comparing the PRESAGE® results and dose values calculated on Pinnacle were observed to be 95·29 and 94·38% in the said planes, respectively, using a 5%/3 mm gamma criteria.ConclusionThe PRESAGE® dose measurements and calculated dose of pinnacle show reasonable agreement in both axial and sagittal planes for complex dual arc VMAT treatment plans. In general, the PRESAGE® dosimeter is found to be a feasible QA tool of VMAT plan for H&N cancer treatment.

Two Quality Control Procedures on Radiotherapy Beam Calibration and Treatment Planning System Implementation

1998 ◽  
Vol 84 (2) ◽  
pp. 150-154 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angelo Piermattei ◽  
Luigi Azario ◽  
Stefania delle Canne ◽  
Andrea Fidanzio ◽  
Giovanni Palazzoni
Keyword(s):  
Quality Control ◽  
Treatment Planning ◽  
High Energy ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System ◽  
Silicon Detectors ◽  
X Ray ◽  
Silicon Diode ◽  
Output Factors ◽  
Control Procedures

New challenging dosimetric approaches, such as narrow beams and 3D algorithms, are being used in radiotherapy. In this paper two quality control (QC) procedures are reported. The first one concerns the QC of the dosimetry of small x-ray beams, generally carried out by using silicon detectors. The comparison of dose values obtained by a silicon diode, a diamond detector, and radiochromic films shows that for x-ray beams of high energy, the silicon diode can give an overestimation of the output factors in phantom, up to 4%. This is due to the higher than unit density silicon diode and the surrounding envelope that restore the lateral electron equilibrium. About the 3D algorithms for breast treatment planning, a quality control test has been adopted to verify the accuracy of the computed dosimetry when “loss of scatter” occurs. The results show a sensible agreement (within 1.5%) between computed and experimental data.

scholarly journals Human applications of the INEL patient treatment planning system

1995 ◽  
Author(s):  
F Wheeler ◽  
D Wessol ◽  
C Atkinson ◽  
D Nigg
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System ◽  
Patient Treatment

Poster - Thurs Eve-05: An assessment of PDDs and outputs predicted by a Monte Carlo-based treatment planning system for electron beams

2008 ◽  
Vol 35 (7Part2) ◽  
pp. 3402-3402
Author(s):  
I AlDahlawi ◽  
M Evans ◽  
B Reniers ◽  
K Asiev ◽  
J Last ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Treatment Planning ◽  
Electron Beams ◽  
Planning System ◽  
Treatment Planning System
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document