Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Medical Physicsarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Medical Physics
Article . 1996 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
Medical Physics
Article . 1996
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Dosimetric verification of intensity‐modulated fields

Authors: X, Wang; S, Spirou; T, LoSasso; J, Stein; C S, Chui; B, Mohan;

Dosimetric verification of intensity‐modulated fields

Abstract

The optimization of intensity distributions and the delivery of intensity‐modulated treatments with dynamic multi‐leaf collimators (MLC) offer important improvements to three‐dimensional conformal radiotherapy. In this study, a nine‐beam intensity‐modulated prostate plan was generated using the inverse radiotherapy technique. The resulting fluence profiles were converted into dynamic MLC leaf motions as functions of monitor units. The leaf motion pattern data were then transferred to the MLC control computer and were used to guide the motions of the leaves during irradiation. To verify that the dose distribution predicted by the optimization and planning systems was actually delivered, a homogeneous polystyrene phantom was irradiated with each of the nine intensity‐modulated beams incident normally on the phantom. For each exposure, a radiographic film was placed normal to the beam in the phantom to record the deposited dose. The films were calibrated and scanned to generate 2‐D isodose distributions. The dose was also calculated by convolving the incident fluence pattern with pencil beams. The measured and calculated dose distributions were compared and found to have discrepancies in excess of 5% of the central axis dose. The source of discrepancies was suspected to be the rounded edges of the leaves and the scattered radiation from the various components of the collimation system. After approximate corrections were made for these effects, the agreement between the two dose distributions was within 2%. We also studied the impact of the “tongue‐and‐groove” effect on dynamic MLC treatments and showed that it is possible to render this effect inconsequential by appropriately synchronizing leaf motions. This study also demonstrated that accurate and rapid delivery of realistic intensity‐modulated plans is feasible using a dynamic multi‐leaf collimator.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Male, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Phantoms, Imaging, Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-Assisted, Biophysics, Humans, Prostatic Neoplasms, Biophysical Phenomena

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    164
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 1%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 1%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
164
Top 10%
Top 1%
Top 1%
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!