Evaluation of beam matching accuracy among six linacs from the same vendor |
| |
Authors: | Chockkalingam Krishnappan Chandrasekaran Anu Radha Karunakaran Balaji Prasanna Kumar Mani Vendhan Subramani Velmurugan Thanigaimalai Madhan Kumar Gunasekaran Velayudham Ramasubramanian |
| |
Affiliation: | 1.Department of Medical Physics,Apollo CBCC Hospitals,Gandhinagar,India;2.School of Advanced Sciences,Vellore Institute of Technology,Vellore,India;3.Department of Radiation Oncology,Glengales Global Hospitals,Chennai,India;4.Department of Medical Physics,Sanjeevani CBCC Cancer Hospital,Raipur,India;5.Department of Radiation Oncology,Apollo Hospitals,Bengaluru,India;6.Department of Medical Physics,CHL CBCC Cancer Centre,Indore,India;7.Department of Radiation Oncology,GVN Hospitals,Tiruchirappalli,India |
| |
Abstract: | The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dosimetric variation among six non-beam-matched Varian linacs using different techniques for the same plans. Six non-beam-matched Varian machines, comprising two Clinac iX, two 600 C/D (Unique), and two True Beam Tx photon 6 MV X-ray devices were acquired. Sixty patients with of head and neck (H&N; 30) and pelvic (30) treatment sites were chosen. For all 60 patients, three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT), intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT), and volumetric-modulated radiotherapy (VMAT) plans were generated for the Clinac iX-1 device; all plans were migrated to the remaining machines, using the eclipse treatment planning system without any modification. The dosimetric variation among the six machines for each target volume and organ at risk was recorded and analyzed. In H&N cases, the maximum variation among the six machines with 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT was 2.57%, 2.6%, and 2.6%, respectively. In pelvic cases, the maximum variation among the six machines with 3DCRT, IMRT, and VMAT was 2.2%, 1.95%, and 2.05%, respectively. Our overall results show that dosimetric variation, while interchanging the plans among the six machines at phantom and patient levels, remains within the limits of clinical acceptability. The noted variation was not correlated with any of these treatment techniques: 3DCRT, IMRT, or VMAT. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|