• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.191-197
• /
• 2014

Purpose : This study presents the usefulness assessment of metal artifact reduction for orthopedic implants(O-MAR) to decrease metal artifacts from materials with high density when acquired CT images. Materials and Methods : By CT simulator, original CT images were acquired from Gammex and Rando phantom and those phantoms inserted with high density materials were scanned for other CT images with metal artifacts and then O-MAR was applied to those images, respectively. To evaluate CT images using Gammex phantom, 5 regions of interest(ROIs) were placed at 5 organs and 3 ROIs were set up at points affected by artifacts. The averages of standard deviation(SD) and CT numbers were compared with a plan using original image. For assessment of variations in dose of tissue around materials with high density, the volume of a cylindrical shape was designed at 3 places in images acquired from Rando phantom by Eclipse. With 6 MV, 7-fields, $15{\time}15cm2$ and 100 cGy per fraction, treatment planning was created and the mean dose were compared with a plan using original image. Results : In the test with the Gammex phantom, CT numbers had a few difference at established points and especially 3 points affected by artifacts had most of the same figures. In the case of O-MAR image, the more reduction in SD appeared at all of 8 points than non O-MAR image. In the test using the Rando Phantom, the variations in dose of tissue around high density materials had a few difference between original CT image and CT image with O-MAR. Conclusion : The CT images using O-MAR were acquired clearly at the boundary of tissue around high density materials and applying O-MAR was useful for correcting CT numbers.

• The Journal of Korean Society for Radiation Therapy
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.57-65
• /
• 2019

Purpose: The purpose is to clarify the effect of additional scattering ratio on the edge of the block according to the increasing block thickness with low melting point lead alloy and pure lead in electron beam therapy. Methods and materials: $10{\times}10cm^2$ Shielding blocks made of low melting point lead alloy and pure lead were fabricated to shield mold frame half of applicator. Block thickness was 3, 5, 10, 15, 20 (mm) for each material. The common irradiation conditions were set at 6 MeV energy, 300 MU / Min dose rate, gantry angle of $0^{\circ}$, and dose of 100 MU. The relative scattering ratio with increasing block thickness was measured with a parallel plate type ion chamber(Exradin P11) and phantom(RW3) by varying the position of the shielding block(cone and on the phantom), the position of the measuring point(surface ans depth of $D_{max}$), and the block material(lead alloy and pure lead). Results : When (depth of measurement / block position / block material) was (surface / applicator / pure lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 15.33 nC(+0.33 %), 15.28 nC(0 %), 15.08 nC(-1.31 %), 15.05 nC(-1.51 %), 15.07 nC(-1.37 %) as the block thickness increased in order of 3, 5, 10, 15, 20 (mm) respectively. When it was (surface / applicator / alloy lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 15.19 nC(-0.59 %), 15.25 nC(-0.20 %), 15.15 nC(-0.85 %), 14.96 nC(-2.09 %), 15.15 nC(-0.85 %) respectively. When it was (surface / phantom / pure lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 15.62 nC(+2.23 %), 15.59 nC(+2.03 %), 15.53 nC(+1.67 %), 15.48 nC(+1.31 %), 15.34 nC(+0.39 %) respectively. When it was (surface / phantom / alloy lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 15.56 nC(+1.83 %), 15.55 nC(+1.77 %), 15.51 nC(+1.51 %), 15.42 nC(+0.92 %), 15.39 nC(+0.72 %) respectively. When it was (depth of $D_{max}$ / applicator / pure lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 16.70 nC(-10.87 %), 16.84 nC(-10.12 %), 16.72 nC(-10.78 %), 16.88 nC(-9.93 %), 16.90 nC(-9.82 %) respectively. When it was (depth of $D_{max}$ / applicator / alloy lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 16.83 nC(-10.19 %), 17.12 nC(-8.64 %), 16.89 nC(-9.87 %), 16.77 nC(-10.51 %), 16.52 nC(-11.85 %) respectively. When it was (depth of $D_{max}$ / phantom / pure lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 17.41 nC(-7.10 %), 17.45 nC(-6.88 %), 17.34 nC(-7.47 %), 17.42 nC(-7.04 %), 17.25 nC(-7.95 %) respectively. When it was (depth of $D_{max}$ / phantom / alloy lead), the relative value(scattering ratio) was 17.45 nC(-6.88 %), 17.44 nC(-6.94 %), 17.47 nC(-6.78 %), 17.43 nC(-6.99 %), 17.35 nC(-7.42 %) respectively. Conclusions: When performing electron therapy using a shielding block, the block position should be inserted applicator rather than the patient's body surface. The block thickness should be made to the minimum appropriate shielding thickness of each corresponding using energy. Also it is useful that the treatment should be performed considering the influence of scattering dose varying with distance from the edge of block.