Instrumental Quality Control of Therapeutic Linear Accelerator Performance
American Journal of Physics and Applications
Volume 5, Issue 5, September 2017, Pages: 66-72
Received: Jul. 19, 2017; Accepted: Jul. 28, 2017; Published: Aug. 16, 2017
Views 1882      Downloads 100
Author
Mohammed Ahmed Ali Omer, Department of Radiologic Technology, College of Applied Medical Science, Qassim University, Buraidah, KSA; Department of Radiotherapy & Nuclear Medicine, College of Medical Radiologic Science, Sudan University of Science and Technology, Khartoum, Sudan
Article Tools
Follow on us
Abstract
The objective of the article was to assess therapeutic linear accelerator performance. Material & method used were quality control tools, direct measurement & theoretical calculation methods. The analysis of results showed that: shift of machine isocenter was 1 mm then increases up to 2 mm through the gantry angles 0 to 300° and 300 to 360 respectively. The diaphragm rotation isocenter clock & anti-clock wise was 1mm. the light and radiation fields showed concise matching up to 9×9 cm, then for 10×10, 14×14 and 16×16 cm there were incongruence by 0.25, 0.3 and 0.41 cm respectively. The increment of the field sizes (2×2, 4×4 - 20×20) cm following SSD increment fitted with the inverse square law significantly (R2 = 1). The theoretical (calculation method) field size was greater than the measured (practical) field size relative to SSD by 0.2 cm. The system output in Gy/Mu increases significantly (R2 = 0.9) as the field size increases in logarithmic equation; while it decreases as SSD increases. The measured output on phantom surface was greater (0.8Gy/MU) than that calculated theoretically which was (0.5 Gy/MU). A significant (R2 = 0.8) reduction in output reading following the increment of temperature for Linac 10 MV and 6 MV respectively, while the pressure lead to significant (0.6) increment of system output reading. TLD showed narrow penumbra extension as 0.32 and 0.2 cm for lianc 6MV and 10MV respectively compared with 0.5 and 0.3 cm at maximum depth dose when obtained from dose histogram.
Keywords
Linear Accelerator, Accuracy, Quality Control, Radiotherapy, Instrumental
To cite this article
Mohammed Ahmed Ali Omer, Instrumental Quality Control of Therapeutic Linear Accelerator Performance, American Journal of Physics and Applications. Vol. 5, No. 5, 2017, pp. 66-72. doi: 10.11648/j.ajpa.20170505.12
Copyright
Copyright © 2017 Authors retain the copyright of this article.
This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
[1]
Indra J. Das, Chee-Wai Cheng, Kashmiri L. Chopra, Raj K. Mitra, Shiv P. Srivastava, Eli Glatstein. (2008). Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy Dose Prescription, Recording, and Delivery: Patterns of Variability Among Institutions and Treatment Planning Systems. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 100 (5), P: 300 – 307. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djn020.
[2]
Dische S, Saunders MI, Williams C, Hopkins A, Aird E. (1993). Precision in reporting the dose given in a course of radiotherapy. Radiotherapy Oncology; 29 (3): 287 – 293.
[3]
ICRU 50. (1993). Prescribing, recording and reporting photon beam therapy, Bethesda, MD: International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. ICRU; Report 50.
[4]
Hulick PR, Ascoli FA. (2005). Quality assurance in Radiation. J Am Coll. Radiology. 2: 613-616.
[5]
Mayles WPM et al. (Eds). (2000). Physics Aspects of Quality Control in Radiotherapy. Report 81, IPEM, York: Institute of Physics and Engineering in Medicine.
[6]
Aristoula Papakostidi, Maria Tolia, Nikolaos Tsoukalas. (2014). Quality assurance in Health Services: the paradigm of Radiotherapy. Journal of Balkan Union of Oncology (JBUON). 19 (1): 47-52.
[7]
American Association of Physics in Medicine (AAPM). Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 40. (1994). Comprehensive QA for Radiation Oncology. Report of AAPM Radiation Therapy Committee Task Group 40, Med Phys. 21: 581-618.
[8]
Gilgen R., R. Kleinrahm and W. Wagner. (1994). Measurement and correlation of the (pressure, density and temperature) relation of argon II. Saturated-liquid and saturated-vapour densities and vapour pressures along the entire coexistence curve. The Journal of Chemical Thermodynamics, 26 (4): 399-413.
[9]
Lauriston S. Taylor and George Singer. (1932). Air density corrections for x-ray ionization chambers. Bureau of Standards Journal of Research, 8 (3): 385-391.
[10]
Subramania Jayaraman and Lawrence H. Lanzl. (2004). Clinical Radiotherapy Physics, 2nd. Edition, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, German.
[11]
Khan Faiz. M. (2010). The physics of radiation therapy, 4th. edition, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins- Philadelphia, PA 19106 USA.
[12]
Masanga W., P. Tangboonduangjit, C. Khamfongkhruea and C. Tannanonta. (2016). Determination of small field output factors in 6 and 10 MV flattening filter free photon beams using various detectors, 13th. South-East Asian Congress of Medical Physics 2015 (SEACOMP) and Journal of Physics: Conference Series 694, 012027. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/694/1/012027.
[13]
Khan Faiz. M. (2003). The physics of radiation therapy, 3rd. edition, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins- Philadelphia, PA 19106 USA.
[14]
Desrosiers, M. F., Lin, M., Cooper, S. L., Cui, Y., Chen, K. A. (2006). Study of the irradiation temperature coefficient for L-alanine and DL-alanine dosimeters. Radiat. Prot. Dosim. 120, 235–237.
[15]
Metcalfe P, Kron T, Elliott A, Wong T, Hoban P. (1993). Dosimetry of 6-MV x-ray beam penumbra. Med Phys. 20 (5): 1439-1445.
ADDRESS
Science Publishing Group
1 Rockefeller Plaza,
10th and 11th Floors,
New York, NY 10020
U.S.A.
Tel: (001)347-983-5186