The importance of accurate linear accelerator head modelling for IMRT Monte Carlo calculations

被引:16
|
作者
Reynaert, N
Coghe, M
De Smedt, B
Paelinck, L
Vanderstraeten, B
De Gersem, W
Van Duyse, B
De Wagter, C
De Neve, W
Thierens, H
机构
[1] State Univ Ghent, Dept Med Phys, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
[2] State Univ Ghent Hosp, Div Radiotherapy, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
来源
PHYSICS IN MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY | 2005年 / 50卷 / 05期
关键词
DOSE CALCULATIONS; PHOTON BEAMS; IMPLEMENTATION; VALIDATION;
D O I
10.1088/0031-9155/50/5/008
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Two Monte Carlo dose engines for radiotherapy treatment planning, namely a beta release of Peregrine and MCDE (Monte Carlo dose engine), were compared with Helax-TMS (collapsed cone superposition convolution) for a head and neck patient for the Elekta SLi plus linear accelerator. Deviations between the beta release of Peregrine and MCDE up to 10% were obtained in the dose volume histogram of the optical chiasm. It was illustrated that the differences are not caused by the particle transport in the patient, but by the modelling of the Elekta SLi plus accelerator head and more specifically the multileaf collimator (MLC). In MCDE two MLC modules (MLCQ and MLCE) were introduced to study the influence of the tongue-and-groove geometry, leaf bank tilt and leakage on the actual dose volume histograms. Differences in integral dose in the optical chiasm up to 3% between the two modules have been obtained. For single small offset beams though the FWHM of lateral profiles obtained with MLCE can differ by more than 1.5 mm from profiles obtained with MLCQ. Therefore, and because the recent version of MLCE is as fast as MLCQ, we advise to use MLCE for modelling the Elekta MLC. Nevertheless there still remains a large difference (up to 10%) between Peregrine and MCDE. By studying small offset beams we have shown that the profiles obtained with Peregrine are shifted, too wide and too flat compared with MCDE and phantom measurements. The overestimated integral doses for small beam segments explain the deviations observed in the dose volume histograms. The Helax-TMS results are in better agreement with MCDE, although deviations exceeding 5% have been observed in the optical chiasm. Monte Carlo dose deviations of more than 10% as found with Peregrine are unacceptable as an influence on the clinical outcome is possible and as the purpose of Monte Carlo treatment planning is to obtain an accuracy of 2%. We would like to emphasize that only the Elekta MLC has been tested in this work, so it is certainly possible that alpha releases of Peregrine provide more accurate results for other accelerators.
引用
收藏
页码:831 / 846
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] OPTIMIZATION OF LINEAR MONTE-CARLO CALCULATIONS
    TROUBETZKOY, ES
    NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 1991, 107 (04) : 359 - 364
  • [22] IMPORTANCE ITERATION IN MORSE MONTE-CARLO CALCULATIONS
    KLOOSTERMAN, JL
    HOOGENBOOM, JE
    NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING, 1994, 117 (01) : 10 - 21
  • [23] IMPORTANCE ESTIMATION IN FORWARD MONTE-CARLO CALCULATIONS
    BOOTH, TE
    HENDRICKS, JS
    NUCLEAR TECHNOLOGY-FUSION, 1984, 5 (01): : 90 - 100
  • [24] Modeling a Multi Leaf Collimator for IMRT Monte Carlo Dose Calculations
    Craig, J.
    Mulligan, M.
    Chen, J.
    Wong, E.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2010, 37 (06)
  • [25] Dynamic Monte Carlo Dose Calculations for IMRT in Geant4
    Hancox, C.
    Seco, J.
    Sharp, G.
    Peroni, M.
    Paganetti, H.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2009, 36 (06)
  • [26] Built in importance estimation in forward Monte Carlo calculations
    Jafarikia, S.
    Feghhi, S. A. H.
    ANNALS OF NUCLEAR ENERGY, 2022, 177
  • [27] An independent Monte Carlo-based IMRT QA tool for a 0.35 T MRI-guided linear accelerator
    Khan, Ahtesham Ullah
    Simiele, Eric A.
    Lotey, Rajiv
    DeWerd, Larry A.
    Yadav, Poonam
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED CLINICAL MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2023, 24 (02):
  • [28] Siemens Primus Linear Accelerator Commissioning for IMRT Verification Using PMCEPT Monte Carlo Code and GAFCHRONICTM EBT Film
    Kum, O.
    Han, Y.
    Cheong, K.
    Ju, S.
    Jeong, H.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2009, 36 (06)
  • [29] Accurate sintering morphologies from Monte Carlo modelling
    Bordère, S
    Gendron, D
    Heintz, JM
    Bernard, D
    Computational Methods and Experiments in Materials Characterisation II, 2005, 51 : 259 - 267
  • [30] A Monte Carlo based modelling of a dedicated mobile IOERT accelerator
    Besheli, M. Ghorbanpour
    Fielitz, O.
    Budach, W.
    Simiantonakis, I.
    RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY, 2016, 119 : S727 - S727