[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
IJRR Information::
For Authors::
For Reviewers::
Subscription::
News & Events::
Web Mail::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
ISSN
Hard Copy 2322-3243
Online 2345-4229
..
Online Submission
Now you can send your articles to IJRR office using the article submission system.
..

AWT IMAGE

AWT IMAGE

Volume 15, Issue 2 (4-2017)                   Int J Radiat Res 2017, 15(2): 157-165 | Back to browse issues page


XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Kang S, Chung J, Lee J, Kim M, Kim Y, Kim J, et al . Dosimetric accuracy of the Acuros XB and Anisotropic analytical algorithm near interface of the different density media for the small fields of a 6- MV flattening-filter-free beam . Int J Radiat Res 2017; 15 (2) :157-165
URL: http://ijrr.com/article-1-1960-en.html
Department of Radiation Oncology, Seoul National University Bungdang Hospital, Seongnam, Korea , jbchung1213@gmail.com
Abstract:   (7900 Views)

Background: This study was conducted to assess the accuracy of dose calculation near the air-phantom interface of a heterogeneous phantom for Acuros XB (AXB) and Anisotropic Analytical Algorithm (AAA) algorithm of a           6-MV flattening-filter-free beam, compared with film measurements. Materials and Methods: A phantom included air gap was specially manufactured for this study. In order to evaluate the dose near air gap-phantom interface, Eclipse treatment planning system equipped both AXB and AAA was used for the dose calculations. Measurements in this region were performed with radiochromic film. The central-axis dose (CAD) and off-axis dose (OAD) between calculations and measurements were analyzed for various field sizes and air gaps. The root-mean-square-error (RMSE) was used to evaluate the difference between the calculated and measured OAD. In order to quantify agreement between the calculated and measured dose distributions, the gamma analysis was performed with the 2%/2 mm and 3%/3 mm criteria. Results: For all fields traveling through 1 and 3 cm air gap, the maximum difference in the calculated CAD was -5.3% for AXB and 214.8% for AAA, compared to the measured CAD. For the RMSE between the calculated and measured OAD, the calculated OAD using AXB showed interval in the RMSE (from 4.4 to 12.7) while using AAA indicated broad (from 7.7 to 101.0). In addition, the gamma passing rates showed that AXB was higher agreement than AAA. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that AXB was more accurate in heterogeneous media near air-phantom interface than AAA when comparing the measured data.

Full-Text [PDF 1380 kb]   (3074 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Short Report | Subject: Radiation Biology

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

International Journal of Radiation Research
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.05 seconds with 48 queries by YEKTAWEB 4718