Suppr超能文献

基于与测量和治疗计划系统数据的比较来确定监测单元检查公差。

Determination of monitor unit check tolerances based on a comparison with measurement and treatment planning system data.

作者信息

Curtis Helen, Richmond Neil, Burke Kevin, Walker Chris

机构信息

Medical Physics Department, The James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough, UK.

出版信息

Med Dosim. 2013 Spring;38(1):81-7. doi: 10.1016/j.meddos.2012.07.005. Epub 2012 Dec 7.

Abstract

This work describes the experimental validation of treatment planning system monitor unit (MU) calculations against measurement for a range of scenarios. This, together with a comparison of treatment planning system MUs and an independent MU check method, allows the derivation of confidence intervals for the check process. Data were collected for open and 60° motorized wedge fields using an Elekta Synergy linac at 6 and 8MV using homogeneous and heterogeneous phantoms. Masterplan (Version 4.0) pencil-beam and collapsed cone algorithms were used for the primary MU calculations with full inhomogeneity correction. Results show that both algorithms agree with measurement to acceptable tolerance levels in the majority of the cases studied. The confidence interval for the pencil-beam algorithm MU against an independent check was determined as + 1.6% to -3.4%. This is modified to + 2.3% to -2.5% when data collected with low-density heterogeneities are removed as this algorithm is not used clinically for these cases. The corresponding interval for the collapsed cone algorithm was + 1.2% to -4.3%, indicating that an offset tolerance for the independent check is appropriate. Analysis of clinical conformal treatment plan data generated using the pencil-beam algorithm (1393 beams) returned 93% of beams within the independent check tolerance. Similarly, using the collapsed cone algorithm as the primary MU calculation, 77% (of 1434 beams) were within the confidence interval.

摘要

这项工作描述了针对一系列场景,治疗计划系统监测单位(MU)计算相对于测量值的实验验证。这与治疗计划系统MU和一种独立MU检查方法的比较一起,使得能够推导出检查过程的置信区间。使用Elekta Synergy直线加速器,在6和8MV能量下,使用均匀和非均匀体模,收集了开放野和60°电动楔形野的数据。主计划(版本4.0)铅笔束和坍缩锥算法用于主要的MU计算,并进行了完全的不均匀性校正。结果表明,在大多数研究案例中,两种算法与测量值的符合程度都在可接受的公差范围内。铅笔束算法MU相对于独立检查的置信区间确定为+1.6%至-3.4%。当去除用低密度不均匀性收集的数据时,该区间修改为+2.3%至-2.5%,因为该算法在临床中不用于这些情况。坍缩锥算法的相应区间为+1.2%至-4.3%,表明独立检查的偏移公差是合适的。对使用铅笔束算法生成的临床适形治疗计划数据(1393束)进行分析,结果显示93%的束在独立检查公差范围内。同样,以坍缩锥算法作为主要的MU计算方法时,(1434束中的)77%在置信区间内。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验