Assessment of Dose Calculation Accuracy of Monaco Treatment Planning System for Effective Wedge Angle in Internal Wedged Fields using Two Different Analytical Methods

被引：0

作者：

Bahari, Ali ^{[1
]}

Zakariaee, Seyed Salman ^{[2
]}

Rezaeejam, Hamed ^{[3
]}

Tarighatnia, Ali ^{[4
]}

Molazadeh, Mikaeil ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz

[2] Department of Medical Physics, Faculty of Paramedical Sciences, Ilam University of Medical Sciences, Ilam

[3] Department of Radiology Technology, School of Paramedical Sciences, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan

[4] Department of Medical Physics, School of Medicine, Ardabil University of Medical Sciences, Ardabil

来源：

Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering | 2025年 / 15卷 / 01期

关键词：

Effective Wedge Angle; Elekta Formula; ICRU-24; Formula; Internal Wedge; Radiometry; Radiotherapy; X-Rays;

D O I：

10.31661/jbpe.v0i0.2409-1816

中图分类号：

学科分类号：

摘要：

Background: In radiotherapy, the accuracy of dose calculation systems plays a key role in the treatment of cancer patients. Objective: The current research aimed to evaluate the dose calculation accuracy of Monaco Treatment Planning System (TPS) in estimating the Effective Wedge Angle (EWA) using two different mathematical methods: Elekta formula and ICRU-24 formula. Material and Methods: In this experimental study, EWAs for different field sizes (5×5, 10×10, 15×15, 20×20, 25×25, and 30×30 cm2) at standard angles (15°, 30°, 45°, and 60°) were computed by the Monaco TPS using two different analytical methods. The practical EWAs were measured according to the conditions outlined in the Elekta formula and the ICRU-24 formula, and these measurements were compared with the results derived from the TPS. Results: The planned and measured EWAs are consistent with the Elekta formula, and the error value was less than ±0.5 in all radiation fields and EWAs. In the ICRU-24 formula, the maximum deviation was ±2.6° between the computational and practical EWAs. Conclusion: The Elekta-based analytical method demonstrates a good agreement between planned and measured EWAs, while the ICRU-24 formula exhibited the greatest discrepancies. © Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering.

引用

页码：37 / 48

页数：11

共 33 条

[1]

Gamit JS, Rao S, Nagesh J, Nair SS, Charan S, Dsouza RN, Sharan K, Chandraguthi S., Validation of Motorized Wedge Effective Isodose Angle with a 2D Array Detector, Iran J Med Phys, 17, 6, pp. 380-385, (2020)

[2]

Ling TC, Slater JM, Nookala P, Mifflin R, Grove R, Ly AM, Et al., Analysis of Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT), Proton and 3D Conformal Radiotherapy (3D-CRT) for Reducing Perioperative Cardiopulmonary Complications in Esophageal Cancer Patients, Cancers (Basel), 6, 4, pp. 2356-2368, (2014)

[3]

Xie X, Ouyang S, Wang H, Yang W, Jin H, Hu B, Shen L., Dosimetric comparison of left-sided whole breast irradiation with 3D-CRT, IP-IMRT and hybrid IMRT, Oncol Rep, 31, 5, pp. 2195-2205, (2014)

[4]

Amaloo C, Nazareth DP, Kumaraswamy LK., Com-parison of hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique and double arc VMAT technique in the treatment of prostate cancer, Radiol Onco, 49, 3, pp. 291-298, (2015)

[5]

Zeinali A, Molazadeh M, Ganjgahi S, Saberi H., Collapsed cone superposition algorithm validation for chest wall tangential fields using virtual wedge filters, J Med Signals Sens, 13, 3, pp. 191-198, (2023)

[6]

Hodapp N., The ICRU Report 83: prescribing, recording and reporting photon-beam intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), Strahlenther Onkol, 188, 1, pp. 97-99, (2012)

[7]

SK S, PA J., Comparison of Beam Profiles and Wedge Factors for Physical And Enhanced Dynamic Wedge, Int J Radiol Radiat Ther, 5, 1, pp. 59-65, (2018)

[8]

Klein EE, Hanley J, Bayouth J, Yin FF, Simon W, Dresser S, Et al., Task Group 142 report: Quality assurance of medical accelerators a, Med Phys, 36, 9, pp. 4197-4212, (2009)

[9]

Fraass B, Doppke K, Hunt M, Kutcher G, Stark-schall G, Stern R, Et al., American Association of Physicists in Medicine Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 53: quality assurance for clinical radiotherapy treatment planning, Med Phys, 25, 10, pp. 1773-1829, (1998)

[10]

Kutcher GJ, Coia L, Gillin M, Hanson WF, Leibel S, Morton RJ, Et al., Comprehensive QA for radiation oncology: report of AAPM radiation therapy committee task group 40, Med Phys, 21, 4, pp. 581-618, (1994)

← 1 2 3 4 →