Comparison of dosimetric characteristics of Siemens virtual and physical wedges

被引:18
作者
Zhu, XR [1 ]
Gillin, MT [1 ]
Jursinic, PA [1 ]
Lopez, F [1 ]
Grimm, DF [1 ]
Rownd, JJ [1 ]
机构
[1] Med Coll Wisconsin, Dept Radiat Oncol, Milwaukee, WI 53226 USA
关键词
wedge; virtual wedge; physical wedge; wedge dosimetry;
D O I
10.1118/1.1312813
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Dosimetric properties of Virtual Wedge (VW) and physical wedge (PW) in 6 and 23 MV photon beams from a Siemens Primus linear accelerator, including wedge factors, depth doses, dose profiles, peripheral doses and surface doses, are compared. While there is a great difference in absolute values of wedge factors, VW factors (VWFs) and PW factors (PWFs) have a similar trend as a function of field size. PWFs have a stronger depth dependence than VWF due to beam hardening in PW fields. VW dose profiles in the wedge direction, in general, match very well with PW, except in the toe area of large wedge angles with large held sizes. Dose profiles in the nonwedge direction show a significant reduction in PW fields due to off-axis beam softening and oblique filtration. PW fields have significantly higher peripheral doses than open and VW fields. VW fields have similar surface doses as the open fields while PW fields have lower surface doses. Surface doses for both VW and PW increase with field size and slightly with wedge angle. For VW fields with wedge angles 45 degrees and less, the initial gap up to 3 cm is dosimetrically acceptable when compared to dose profiles of PW. VW fields in general use less monitor units than PW fields. (C) 2000 American Association of Physicists in Medicine. [S0094-2405(00)02710-3].
引用
收藏
页码:2267 / 2277
页数:11
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], TREATMENT PLANNING D
[2]  
Avadhani J. S., 1997, Strahlentherapie und Onkologie, V173, P524
[3]   THE RELATION BETWEEN WEDGE FACTORS IN AIR AND WATER [J].
BARDEROMA, RD ;
BJARNGARD, BE .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1994, 21 (07) :1043-1047
[4]  
BATISH RJ, 1995, MED PHYS, V22, P1467
[5]  
BJARNGARD BE, 1994, MED PHYS, V21, P1069, DOI 10.1118/1.597349
[6]   A comparison of different intensity modulation treatment techniques for tangential breast irradiation [J].
Chang, SX ;
Deschesne, KM ;
Cullip, TJ ;
Parker, SA ;
Earnhart, J .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 1999, 45 (05) :1305-1314
[7]   BEAM PROFILES ALONG THE NONWEDGED DIRECTION FOR LARGE WEDGED FIELDS [J].
CHUI, CS ;
LOSASSO, T .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1994, 21 (11) :1685-1690
[8]   Wedge factors: Dependence on depth and field size [J].
Cozzi, AF ;
Cozzi, L ;
Garavaglia, G .
RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 1996, 39 (01) :31-34
[9]  
Das IJ, 1998, MED PHYS, V25, pA204
[10]   Validation of a new virtual wedge model [J].
Desobry, GE ;
Waldron, TJ ;
Das, IJ .
MEDICAL PHYSICS, 1998, 25 (01) :71-72