Premium
TU‐AB‐BRC‐04: Commissioning of a New MLC Model for the GEPTS Monte Carlo System: A Model Based On the Leaf and Interleaf Effective Density
Author(s) -
Chibani O,
Tahanout F,
Ma C
Publication year - 2016
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 - 10.1118/1.4957398
Subject(s) - monte carlo method , materials science , optics , physics , mathematics , statistics
Purpose: To commission a new MLC model for the GEPTS Monte Carlo system. The model is based on the concept of leaves and interleaves effective densities Methods: GEPTS is a Monte Carlo system to be used for external beam planning verification. GEPTS incorporates detailed photon and electron transport algorithms (Med.Phys. 29, 2002, 835). A new GEPTS model for the Varian Millennium MLC is presented. The model accounts for: 1) thick (1 cm) and thin (0.5 cm) leaves, 2) tongue‐and‐groove design, 3) High‐Transmission (HT) and Low‐Transmission (LT) interleaves, and 4) rounded leaf end. Leaf (and interleaf) height is set equal to 6 cm. Instead of modeling air gaps, screw holes, and complex leaf heads, “effective densities” are assigned to: 1) thin leaves, 2) thick leaves, 3) HT‐, and 4) LT‐interleaves. Results: The new MLC model is used to calculate dose profiles for Closed‐MLC and Tongue‐and‐Groove fields at 5 cm depth for 6, 10 and 15 MV Varian beams. Calculations are compared with 1) Pin‐point ionization chamber transmission ratios and 2) EBT3 Radiochromic films. Pinpoint readings were acquired beneath thick and thin leaves, and HT and LT interleaves. The best fit of measured dose profiles was obtained for the following parameters: Thick‐leaf density = 16.1 g/cc, Thin‐leaf density = 17.2 g/cc; HT Interleaf density = 12.4 g/cc, LT Interleaf density = 14.3 g/cc; Interleaf thickness = 1.1 mm. Attached figures show comparison of calculated and measured transmission ratios for the 3 energies. Note this is the only study where transmission profiles are compared with measurements for 3 different energies. Conclusion: The new MLC model reproduces transmission measurements within 0.1%. The next step is to implement the MLC model for real plans and quantify the improvement in dose calculation accuracy gained using this model for IMRT plans with high modulation factors.