Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userMeasuring foetal dose from tomotherapy treatments
74
0
0.0
(
0
)
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
Introduction: Treating pregnant women in the radiotherapy clinic is a rare occurrence. When it does occur, it is vital that the dose received by the developing embryo or foetus is understood as fully as possible. This study presents the first investigation of foetal doses delivered during helical tomotherapy treatments. Materials & Methods: Six treatment plans were delivered to an anthropomorphic phantom using a tomotherapy machine. These included treatments of the brain, unilateral and bilateral head-and-neck, chest wall, and upper lung. Measurements of foetal dose were made with an ionisation chamber positioned at various locations longitudinally within the phantom to simulate a variety of patient anatomies. Results: All measurements were below the established limit of 100 mGy for a high risk of damage during the first trimester. The largest dose encountered was 75 mGy (0.125% of prescription dose). The majority of treatments with measurement positions less than 30 cm fell into the range of uncertain risk (50 - 100 mGy). All treatments with measurement positions beyond 30 cm fell into the low risk category (< 50 mGy). Conclusions: For the cases in this study, tomotherapy resulted in foetal doses that are at least on par with, if not significantly lower than, similar 3D conformal or intensity-modulated treatments delivered with other devices. Recommendations were also provided for estimating foetal doses from tomotherapy plans.
rate research
Read More
Statistical iterative reconstruction is expected to improve the image quality of megavoltage computed tomography (MVCT). However, one of the challenges of iterative reconstruction is its large computational cost. The purpose of this work is to develop a fast iterative reconstruction algorithm by combining several iterative techniques and by optimizing reconstruction parameters. Megavolt projection data was acquired from a TomoTherapy system and reconstructed using our statistical iterative reconstruction. Total variation was used as the regularization term and the weight of the regularization term was determined by evaluating signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and visual assessment of spatial resolution using Gammex and Cheese phantoms. Gradient decent with an adaptive convergence parameter, ordered subset expectation maximization (OSEM), and CPU/GPU parallelization were applied in order to accelerate the present reconstruction algorithm. The SNR and CNR of the iterative reconstruction were several times better than that of filtered back projection (FBP). The GPU parallelization code combined with the OSEM algorithm reconstructed an image several hundred times faster than a CPU calculation. With 500 iterations, which provided good convergence, our method produced a 512$times$512 pixel image within a few seconds. The image quality of the present algorithm was much better than that of FBP for patient data. An image from the iterative reconstruction in TomoTherapy can be obtained within few seconds by fine-tuning the parameters. The iterative reconstruction with GPU was fast enough for clinical use, and largely improve the MVCT images.
This paper focuses on some dosimetry aspects of proton therapy and pencil beam scanning based on the experience accumulated at Paul Scherrer Institute(PSI). The basic formalism for absolute dosimetry in proton therapy is outlined and the two main techniques and equipment to perform the primary beam monitor chamber calibration are presented. Depth-dose curve and lateral beam width measurements are exposed and discussed in detail, with particular attention to the size of the ionization chamber and the characteristic of scintillating-CCD dosimetry systems, respectively. It is also explained how the angular-spatial distribution of individual pencil beams can be determined in practice. The equipment and the techniques for performing regularmachine-specific quality checks are focused on (i)output constancy checks, (ii)pencil beam position and size checks and (iii)beam energy checks. Finally, patient-specific verification is addressed.
A new variant of the pencil-beam (PB) algorithm for dose distribution calculation for radiotherapy with protons and heavier ions, the grid-dose spreading (GDS) algorithm, is proposed. The GDS algorithm is intrinsically faster than conventional PB algorithms due to approximations in convolution integral, where physical calculations are decoupled from simple grid-to-grid energy transfer. It was effortlessly implemented to a carbon-ion radiotherapy treatment planning system to enable realistic beam blurring in the field, which was absent with the broad-beam (BB) algorithm. For a typical prostate treatment, the slowing factor of the GDS algorithm relative to the BB algorithm was 1.4, which is a great improvement over the conventional PB algorithms with a typical slowing factor of several tens. The GDS algorithm is mathematically equivalent to the PB algorithm for horizontal and vertical coplanar beams commonly used in carbon-ion radiotherapy while dose deformation within the size of the pristine spread occurs for angled beams, which was within 3 mm for a single proton pencil beam of $30^circ$ incidence, and needs to be assessed against the clinical requirements and tolerances in practical situations.
Purpose: To develop a model to generate volumetric dose distribution from two isodose surfaces (iso-surfaces), and to interactively tune dose distribution by iso-surface dragging. Methods: We model volumetric dose distribution as analytical extension of two iso-surfaces with the extension variables as distances to iso-surfaces. We built a 3D lookup table (LUT) which are generated based on clinical dose distributions. Two LUT tables store the mean and standard deviation of voxel dose values of clinical doses and binned as distance to 100% iso-surface, reference iso-surface and reference dose level. The process of interactive tuning starts from a given base plan. A user drags iso-surface for a desired carving. Our method responds with tuned dose. The derivation of tuned dose follows two steps. Dose is extended from the two user-desired iso-surfaces (eg.100% and 50%) to the whole patient volume by table lookup, using distances to two iso-surfaces and reference dose level as keys. Then we fine tune the extended dose by a correction strategy utilizing the information of base plan. Results: We validated this method on coplanar VMAT doses of post-operative prostate plans. The LUT was populated by dose distributions of 27 clinical plans. We optimized two plans with different rectum sparing for an independent case to mimic the process of dose tuning. The plan with less rectum sparing is set as base plan. The 50% iso-surface of the more-sparing plan is defined as the desired iso-surface input. The dose output by our method (expansion and correction) agrees with the more-sparing plan obtained by optimization, in terms of gamma (97.2%), DVH and profiles. The overall dose reconstruction time is within two seconds. Conclusion: We developed a distance-to-isosurface based volumetric dose reconstruction method, and applied it to interactive tuning with iso-surface dragging.
To compare the dosimetrical differences between plans generated by helical tomotherapy using 2D or 3D margining technique in in prostate cancer. Ten prostate cancer patients were included in this study. For 2D plans, planning target volume (PTV) was created by adding 5 mm (lateral/anterior-posterior) to clinical target volume (CTV). For 3D plans, 5 mm margin was added not only in lateral/anterior-posterior, but also in superior-inferior to CTV. Various dosimetrical indices, including the prescription isodose to target volume (PITV) ratio, conformity index (CI), homogeneity index (HI), target coverage index (TCI), modified dose homogeneity index (MHI), conformation number (CN), critical organ scoring index (COSI), and quality factor (QF) were determined to compare the different treatment plans. Differences between 2D and 3D PTV indices were not significant except for CI (p = 0.023). 3D margin plans (11195 MUs) resulted in higher (13.0%) monitor units than 2D margin plans (9728 MUs). There were no significant differences in any OARs between the 2D and 3D plans. Overall, the average 2D plan dose was slightly lower than the 3D plan dose. Compared to the 2D plan, the 3D plan increased average treatment time by 1.5 minutes; however, this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.082). We confirmed that 2D and 3D margin plans are not significantly different with regard to various dosimetric indices such as PITV, CI, and HI for PTV, and OARs with tomotherapy.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
