Open AccessDevelopment of a time-resolved mirrorless scintillation detector
Author(s) -
Wonjoong Cheon,
Hyun Ae Jung,
Moon-Hee Lee,
Jinhyeop Lee,
Sung Jin Kim,
Sungkoo Cho,
Youngyih Han
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
plos one
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.99
H-Index - 332
ISSN - 1932-6203
DOI - 10.1371/journal.pone.0246742
Subject(s) - optics , scintillator , scintillation , physics , dosimetry , dosimeter , brightness , detector , nuclear medicine , radiation , medicine
Purpose We developed a compact and lightweight time-resolved mirrorless scintillation detector (TRMLSD) employing image processing techniques and a convolutional neural network (CNN) for high-resolution two-dimensional (2D) dosimetry. Methods The TRMLSD comprises a camera and an inorganic scintillator plate without a mirror. The camera was installed at a certain angle from the horizontal plane to collect scintillation from the scintillator plate. The geometric distortion due to the absence of a mirror and camera lens was corrected using a projective transform. Variations in brightness due to the distance between the image sensor and each point on the scintillator plate and the inhomogeneity of the material constituting the scintillator were corrected using a 20.0 × 20.0 cm 2 radiation field. Hot pixels were removed using a frame-based noise-reduction technique. Finally, a CNN-based 2D dose distribution deconvolution model was applied to compensate for the dose error in the penumbra region and a lack of backscatter. The linearity, reproducibility, dose rate dependency, and dose profile were tested for a 6 MV X-ray beam to verify dosimeter characteristics. Gamma analysis was performed for two simple and 10 clinical intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) plans. Results The dose linearity with brightness ranging from 0.0 cGy to 200.0 cGy was 0.9998 (R-squared value), and the root-mean-square error value was 1.010. For five consecutive measurements, the reproducibility was within 3% error, and the dose rate dependency was within 1%. The depth dose distribution and lateral dose profile coincided with the ionization chamber data with a 1% mean error. In 2D dosimetry for IMRT plans, the mean gamma passing rates with a 3%/3 mm gamma criterion for the two simple and ten clinical IMRT plans were 96.77% and 95.75%, respectively. Conclusion The verified accuracy and time-resolved characteristics of the dosimeter may be useful for the quality assurance of machines and patient-specific quality assurance for clinical step-and-shoot IMRT plans.