Premium
SU‐E‐J‐19: An Intra‐Institutional Study of Cone‐Beam CT Dose for Image‐Guided Radiation Therapy
Author(s) -
Knutson N,
Rankine L,
Reilly M,
Li H
Publication year - 2015
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.4924106
Subject(s) - truebeam , ionization chamber , imaging phantom , nuclear medicine , dosimetry , cone beam computed tomography , medicine , cone beam ct , computed tomography , beam (structure) , linear particle accelerator , physics , radiology , optics , ionization , ion , quantum mechanics
Purpose: To determine the variability of Cone‐Beam CT Dose Index (CB‐CTDI) across multiple on‐board imaging (OBI) systems within a single institution, and compare this to manufacturer provided data. Methods: The CB‐CTDI was measured on three Trilogy and three TrueBeam Varian OBI systems, for six different clinically used scan protocols. Measurements were taken using a 10 cm long CT ionization chamber in either a 16 cm (head‐simulating) or 32 cm (body‐simulating) diameter, acrylic, cylindrical, 15 cm long CTDI phantom. We assessed the variation in CB‐CTDI between the OBI systems and compared our measured values to the data provided by the manufacturer. Results: The standard error in the CB‐CTDI measured for all protocols was found to be within ±2% and ±5% of the mean for TrueBeam and Trilogy, respectively. For all head scan protocols, the measured TrueBeam values were lower than the manufacturer's reported values, with a maximum difference of 13.9% and an average difference of 11%. For the body scan protocols, the TrueBeam measured values were 3% and 13% greater than the manufacturer's reported values for two out of three protocols, and 38% lower than reported for the third protocol. In total, 7/18 CB‐CTDI measurements fell within the manufacturers specified range (±10%). Across all scans the Truebeam machines were found to have a lower CB‐CTDI than Trilogy, particularly the head scan protocols, which show decreases of up to 30% . Conclusion: The intra‐institutional variation of CB‐CTDI was found to be clinically acceptable at less than 5%. For the TrueBeam OBI system, over half of the measured scans failed to fall with in the manufactured quoted range of 10%, however, all measured values were within 15% of the manufacturer's reported values. For accurate assessment and reporting of imaging dose to radiotherapy patients, our results indicate a need for standardization in CB‐CTDI measurement technique.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom