Useful island block geometries of a passive intensity modulator used for intensity-modulated bolus electron conformal therapy.
Useful island block geometries of a passive intensity modulator used for intensity-modulated bolus electron conformal therapy.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/acm2.13079
复制
发表时间：
2020-12
影响因子：
2.1
通讯作者：
Hogstrom KR
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chambers EL;Carver RL;Hogstrom KR
该项目确定了可用于临床使用调强团注电子适形治疗（IM‐BECT）的岛状阻滞几何构型范围。在100和103 cm源-表面距离（SSD）下，针对7 - 20 MeV的7种电子能量研究了多个半束岛块几何形状。我们研究了在0.5厘米和2.0厘米的深度在水中的相对注量分布，从而在28个独特的光束条件。对于每种光束条件，我们研究了强度降低因子（IRF）值为0.70，0.75，0.80，0.85，0.90和0.95，以及岛块的六边形填充间距为0.50，0.75，1.00，1.25和1.50 cm，即30种独特的IM配置和840种独特的光束-IM组合。如果强度调制器下游的平均强度在预期强度的2%范围内，且通量变化小于± 2%，则认为组合可接受。对于100 cm SSD和0.5 cm深度，结果表明，13 MeV以上的射束能量没有表现出足够的散射，无法为所有IRF值（0.70-0.95）产生临床可接受的通量（强度）分布。特别是，20 MeV的注量分布对于任何值都是不可接受的，可接受的16 MeV注量分布被限制为最小IRF 0.85。对于2.0 cm的深度，高达20 MeV（包括20 MeV）的射束能量具有可接受的注量分布。对于103 cm SSD以及0.5 cm和2.0 cm深度，结果表明，对于所有IRF值（0.70-0.95），所有射束能量（7-20 MeV）均具有临床可接受的通量分布。一般来说，临床上更可能的103 cm SSD具有可接受的通量分布，具有较大的间隔（r），允许较大的块直径。岛块分离和IRF值（块直径）产生临床适当的IM电子束的几何操作范围已被确定。
This project determined the range of island block geometric configurations useful for the clinical utilization of intensity‐modulated bolus electron conformal therapy (IM‐BECT). Multiple half‐beam island block geometries were studied for seven electron energies 7‐20 MeV at 100 and 103 cm source‐to‐surface distance (SSD). We studied relative fluence distributions at 0.5 cm and 2.0 cm depths in water, resulting in 28 unique beam conditions. For each beam condition, we studied intensity reduction factor (IRF) values of 0.70, 0.75, 0.80, 0.85, 0.90, and 0.95, and hexagonal packing separations for the island blocks of 0.50, 0.75, 1.00, 1.25, and 1.50 cm, that is, 30 unique IM configurations and 840 unique beam‐IM combinations. A combination was deemed acceptable if the average intensity downstream of the intensity modulator agreed within 2% of that intended and the variation in fluence was less than ±2%. For 100 cm SSD, and for 0.5 cm depth, results showed that beam energies above 13 MeV did not exhibit sufficient scatter to produce clinically acceptable fluence (intensity) distributions for all IRF values (0.70–0.95). In particular, 20 MeV fluence distributions were unacceptable for any values, and acceptable 16 MeV fluence distributions were limited to a minimum IRF of 0.85. For the 2.0 cm depth, beam energies up to and including 20 MeV had acceptable fluence distributions. For 103 cm SSD and for 0.5 cm and 2.0 cm depths, results showed that all beam energies (7–20 MeV) had clinically acceptable fluence distributions for all IRF values (0.70–0.95). In general, the more clinically likely 103 cm SSD had acceptable fluence distributions with larger separations (r), which allow larger block diameters. The geometric operating range of island block separations and IRF values (block diameters) producing clinically appropriate IM electron beams has been determined.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
2.1
作者：
Su S;Moran K;Robar JL
通讯作者：
Robar JL
影响因子：
3.8
作者：
Carver, Robert L.;Hogstrom, Kenneth R.;Sprunger, Conrad P.
通讯作者：
Sprunger, Conrad P.
影响因子：
1.2
作者：
Kim, Michelle M.;Kudchadker, Rajat J.;Perkins, George H.
通讯作者：
Perkins, George H.
影响因子：
2.1
作者：
Kudchadker, R J;Antolak, J A;Hogstrom, K R
通讯作者：
Hogstrom, K R
DOI：
10.1016/s0360-3016(02)02811-0
发表时间：
2002-07-15
影响因子：
7
作者：
Kudchadker, RJ;Hogstrom, KR;Antolak, JA
通讯作者：
Antolak, JA