소조사면 선량 계측을 위한 엣지검출기의 특성 분석

Dosimetric Characteristics of Edge $Detector^{TM}$ in Small Beam Dosimetry

  • 장경환 (고려대학교 방사선학과) ;
  • 이보람 (고려대학교 방사선학과) ;
  • 김유현 (고려대학교 방사선학과) ;
  • 최경식 (안양샘병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 이정석 (안양샘병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 박병문 (건국대학교병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 배용기 (건국대학교병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 홍세미 (건국대학교병원 방사선종양학과) ;
  • 이정우 (건국대학교병원 방사선종양학과)
  • Chang, Kyung-Hwan (Department of Radiologic Science, Korea University) ;
  • Lee, Bo-Ram (Department of Radiologic Science, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, You-Hyun (Department of Radiologic Science, Korea University) ;
  • Choi, Kyoung-Sik (Department of Radiation Oncology, Sam Anyang Medical Center) ;
  • Lee, Jung-Seok (Department of Radiation Oncology, Sam Anyang Medical Center) ;
  • Park, Byung-Moon (Department of Radiation Oncology, Konkuk University Medical Center) ;
  • Bae, Yong-Ki (Department of Radiation Oncology, Konkuk University Medical Center) ;
  • Hong, Se-Mie (Department of Radiation Oncology, Konkuk University Medical Center) ;
  • Lee, Jeong-Woo (Department of Radiation Oncology, Konkuk University Medical Center)
  • 발행 : 2009.12.31

초록

이 연구의 목적은 소조사면 선량계측을 위하여 엣지검출기의 성능을 평가하기 위함이다. 다양한 소조사면과 깊이에서 엣지검출기(Model 1118 Edge)를 이용하여 6 MV 광자선의 선량 직선성, 선량률 의존도, 출력 계수, 선량 측면도 및 심부선량 백분율을 따라 측정하였으며, 이를 표준용적의 이온전리함(CC13)과 광자선 다이오드 검출기(PFD)와 비교하였다. 선량 직선성을 일차 선형 맞춤 함수와 비교하였을 때, 세 검출기 모두 1% 미만의 차이를 나타냈으며, 엣지검출기는 -0.08~0.08%의 가장 낮은 차이를 보였다. 선량율의 변화(100~600 MU/min)에 따라 PFD와 엣지검출기의 정규화된 반응비는 1% 미만의 일정한 값을 보였으나, CC13은 100 MU/min에서 약 -5%의 변화를 나타냈다. 조사면의 크기($4{\times}4\;cm^2{\sim}10{\times}10\;cm^2$)에 따른 출력계수는 세 검출기 모두 거의 같은 값을 보였으나, $4{\times}4\;cm^2$ 이하의 소조사면에서는 엣지검출기와 PFD의 출력 계수가 CC13과 최대 21%의 차이보였다. 각 조사면에서 20~80%의 반음영 폭을 측정하였을 때, 평균적으로 CC13은 엣지검출기보다 2배, PFD는 약 30% 정도 더 넓게 나타났다. 또한 10~90%의 반음영의 경우, CC13과 PFD가 각각 55%와 19% 정도 더 넓은 폭을 나타냈다. 엣지검출기는 선량 측면도의 반치폭이 조사면의 크기와 거의 일치하였으나, 다른 두 검출기는 조사면의 크기보다 약 8~10% 더 크게 나타났으며, 심부선량백분율은 각 조사면에서 세 검출기 모두 거의 일치하였다. 엣지검출기의 성능평가를 위한 선량특성을 분석한 결과, $4{\times}4\;cm^2$ 이하의 소조사면에서 가장 적합한 특성을 나타냈으며, CC13과 PFD와 같은 검출기는 조사면이 작을수록 상당한 오차를 나타낼 수 있음을 알 수 있었다.

In this study, we evaluated an edge detector for small-beam dosimetry. We measured the dose linearity, dose rate dependence, output factor, beam profiles, and percentage depth dose using an edge detector (Model 1118 Edge) for 6-MV photon beams at different field sizes and depths. The obtained values were compared with those obtained using a standard volume ionization chamber (CC13) and photon diode detector (PFD). The dose linearity results for the three detectors showed good agreement within 1%. The edge detector had the best linearity of ${\pm}0.08%$. The edge detector and PFD showed little dose rate dependency throughout the range of 100~600 MU/min, while CC13 showed a significant discrepancy of approximately -5% at 100 MU/min. The output factors of the three detectors showed good agreement within 1% for the tested field sizes. However, the output factor of CC13 compared to the other two detectors had a maximum difference of 21% for small field sizes (${\sim}4{\times}4\;cm^2$). When analyzing the 20~80% penumbra, the penumbra measured using CC13 was approximately two times wider than that using the edge detector for all field sizes. The width measured using PFD was approximately 30% wider for all field sizes. Compared to the edge detector, the 10~90% penumbras measured using the CC13 and PFD were approximately 55% and 19% wider, respectively. The full width at half maximum (FWHM) of the edge detector was close to the real field size, while the other two detectors measured values that were 8~10% greater for all field sizes. Percentage depth doses measured by the three detectors corresponded to each other for small beams. Based on the results, we consider the edge detector as an appropriate small-beam detector, while CC13 and PFD can lead to some errors when used for small beam fields under $4{\times}4\;cm^2$.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Westermark M, Arndt J, Nilsson B, Brahme A: Comparative dosimetry in narrow high-energy photon beams. Phys Med Biol 45:685-702 (2000) https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/45/3/308
  2. Bucciolini M, Buonamici FB, Mazzocchi S, De Angelis C, Onori S, Cirrone GA: Diamond detector versus silicon diode and ion chamber in photon beams of different energy and field size. Med Phys 30:2149-2154 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1591431
  3. Aaki F, Ishidoya T, Ikegami T, Moribie N, Yamashita Y: Application of a radiophotoluminescent glass plate dosimeter for small field dosimetry. Med Phys 32:1548-1554 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1925187
  4. Laub WU, Wong T: The volume effect of detectors in the dosimetry of small fields used in IMRT. Med Phys 30:341-247 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1544678
  5. Stasi M, Baiotto B, Barnoni G, Scielzo G: The behavior of several microionization chambers in small intensity modulated radiotherapy fields. Med Phys 31:2792-2795 (2004) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1788911
  6. Das IJ, Cheng CW, Watts RJ, et al: Accelerator beam data commissioning equipment and procedures: report of the TG-106 of the therapy physics committee of the AAPM. Med Phys 35: 4186-4215 (2008) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.2969070
  7. Martens C, De Wagter C, De Neve W: The value of the pinpoint ion chamber for characterization of small field segments used in intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Phys Med Biol 45: 2519-2530 (2000) https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/45/9/306
  8. Shi J, Simon WE, Zhu TC: Modeling the instantaneous dose rate dependence of radiation diode detectors. Med Phys 30: 2509-2519 (2003) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1602171
  9. Heydarian M, Hoban PW, Beddoe AH: A comparison of dosimetry techniques in stereotactic radiosurgery. Phys Med Biol 41:93-110 (1996) https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/41/1/008
  10. De Angelis C, Onori S, Pacilio M, et al: An investigation of the operating characteristics of two PTW diamond detectors in photon and electron beams. Med Phys 29:248-254 (2002) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1446101
  11. Pappas E, Petrokokkinos L, Angelopoulos A, et al: Relative output factor measurements of a 5 mm diameter radiosurgical photon beam using polymer gel dosimetry. Med Phys 32:1513-1520 (2005) https://doi.org/10.1118/1.1916048
  12. McKerracher C, Thwaites DI: Assessment of new small-field detectors against standard-field detectors for practical stereotactic beam data acquisition. Phys Med Biol 44:2143-2160 (1999) https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/44/9/303