Kim J L, Lee J I, Ji Y H, Kim B H, Kim J S, Chang S Y
Health Physics Department, Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, Daejeon, Korea.
Radiat Prot Dosimetry. 2006;119(1-4):353-6. doi: 10.1093/rpd/nci627. Epub 2006 Apr 27.
The energy responses for the KLT-300(LiF:Mg,Cu,Na,Si, Korea), GR-200(LiF:Mg,Cu,P, China) and MCP-N(LiF:Mg,Cu,P, Poland) thermoluminescence(TL) pellets were studied for a photon radiation with energies from 1.25 MeV(60Co) to 21 MV (Microtron) to verify the usefulness of the calibration for the radiotherapy beams. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the World Health Organization (WHO) have performed thermoluminescence dosimetry (TLD) audits to verify the calibration of the beams by TL powder, but TL pellets were used in this study because the element correction factor (ECF), defined as the factor to correct the variations that all TL dosemeters cannot be manufactured to have exactly the same TL efficiency, for each TL pellet could be accurately derived and be handled conveniently when compared with the powder. Also several works for the energy response of the TLDs were done for the low-energy photon beams up to 60Co, but they will be extended in this experiment to the high photon energies (up to 20 MV), which are widely used in the therapy level of a radiation. The PTW 30006 ionisation chamber was calibrated by the Korea primary standards to establish the air-kerma rates and the TL pellets were irradiated in a specially designed waterproof pellet holder in a water phantom (30 x 30 x 30 cm3) just like the IAEA postal audits programme. This result was compared with that of another type of phantom [10 (W) x 10 (L) x 10 (H) cm3 PMMA Perspex phantom for the 60Co and 6 MV photon, and 10 x 10 x 20 (H) cm3 for the 10 and 21 MV photon] for its convenient use and easy handling and installation in a hospital. The results show that the differences of the responses for the water phantom and PMMA Perspex phantom were negligible, which is contrary to the general conception that a big difference would be expected. For an application of these results to verify the therapy beams, an appropriate energy correction factor should be applied to the energies and phantom types in use.
研究了KLT - 300(LiF:Mg,Cu,Na,Si,韩国)、GR - 200(LiF:Mg,Cu,P,中国)和MCP - N(LiF:Mg,Cu,P,波兰)热释光(TL)剂量计对能量范围从1.25 MeV(60Co)到21 MV(电子回旋加速器)的光子辐射的能量响应,以验证放射治疗束校准的有效性。国际原子能机构(IAEA)和世界卫生组织(WHO)已开展热释光剂量测定(TLD)审核,以通过TL粉末验证束流校准,但本研究使用TL剂量计是因为与粉末相比,每种TL剂量计的元素校正因子(ECF)(定义为校正所有TL剂量计无法制造得具有完全相同TL效率的变化的因子)能够准确得出且便于处理。此外,针对能量高达60Co的低能光子束开展了多项关于TLD能量响应的工作,但本实验将其扩展至高光子能量(高达20 MV),这些能量在放射治疗中广泛应用。PTW 30006电离室由韩国一级标准进行校准以确定空气比释动能率,TL剂量计在水模体(30×30×30 cm3)中一个专门设计的防水剂量计支架中进行照射,就像IAEA邮政审核计划那样。将该结果与另一种模体(60Co和6 MV光子用10(宽)×10(长)×10(高)cm3 PMMA有机玻璃模体,10和21 MV光子用10×10×20(高)cm3)的结果进行比较,因其使用方便且便于在医院中操作和安装。结果表明,水模体和PMMA有机玻璃模体响应的差异可忽略不计,这与预期会有很大差异的一般概念相反。为将这些结果应用于验证治疗束,应针对所使用的能量和模体类型应用适当的能量校正因子。