liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 3 of 3
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Ghazal, Mohammed
    et al.
    Karolinska Univ Hosp, Sweden.
    Westermark, Mathias
    Karolinska Univ Hosp, Sweden.
    Kaveckyte, Vaiva
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Karolinska Univ Hosp, Sweden.
    Carlsson Tedgren, Åsa
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Diagnostics, Medical radiation physics. Karolinska Univ Hosp, Sweden.
    Benmakhlouf, Hamza
    Karolinska Univ Hosp, Sweden.
    6-MV small field output factors: intra-/intermachine comparison and implementation of TRS-483 using various detectors and several linear accelerators2019In: Medical physics (Lancaster), ISSN 0094-2405, Vol. 46, no 11, p. 5350-5359Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Purpose To investigate the applicability of output correction factors reported in TRS-483 on 6-MV small-field detector-reading ratios using four solid-state detectors. Also, to investigate variations in 6-MV small-field output factors (OF) among nominally matched linear accelerators (linacs). Methods The TRS-483 Code of Practice (CoP) introduced and provided output correction factors to be applied to measured detector-reading ratios to obtain OFs for several small-field detectors. Detector readings for 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm to 8 cm x 8 cm fields were measured and normalized to that of 10 cm x 10 cm field giving the detector-reading ratios. Three silicon diodes, IBA PFD, IBA EFD (IBA, Schwarzenbruck, Germany), PTW T60017, and one microdiamond, PTW T60019 (PTW, Freiburg, Germany), were used. Output correction factors from the CoP were applied to measured detector-reading ratios. Measurements were performed on six Clinac and six TrueBeam linacs (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, USA). An investigation of the relationship between the size of small fields and corresponding detector-reading ratio among the linacs was performed by measuring lateral dose profiles for 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm fields to determine the full width half maximum (FWHM). The relationship between the linacs focal spot size and the small-field detector-reading ratio was investigated by measuring 10 cm x 10 cm lateral dose profiles and determining the penumbra width reflecting the focal spot size. Measurement geometry was as follows: gantry angle = 0 degrees, collimator angle = 0 degrees, source-to surface distance (SSD) = 90 cm, and depth in water = 10 cm. Results For a given linac and 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm field, the deviations in detector-reading ratios among the detectors were 9%-15% for the Clinacs and 4%-5% for the TrueBeams. Use of output correction factors reduced these deviations to 6%-12% and 3%-4%, respectively. For field sizes equal to or larger than 0.8 cm x 0.8 cm, the deviations were corrected to 1% using output correction factors for both Clinacs and TrueBeams. For a given detector and 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm field, the deviations in detector-reading ratios among the linacs were 11%-17% for the Clinacs and 5-6% for the TrueBeams. For 1 cm x 1 cm the deviations were 1%-2% for Clinacs and 1% for TrueBeams. For field sizes larger than 1 cm x 1 cm the deviations were within 1% for both Clinacs and TrueBeams. No relationship between FWHMs and detector-reading ratios for 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm was observed. For Clinacs, larger 10 cm x 10 cm penumbra width yielded lower 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm detector-reading ratio indicating an effect of the focal spot size. For TrueBeams, the spread of penumbra widths was lower compared to Clinacs and no similar relationship was observed. Conclusions Output correction factors from the TRS-483 CoP are not sufficient for accurate determination of OF for 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm fields but are applicable for 0.8 cm x 0.8 cm to 8 cm x 8 cm fields. Nominally matched Clinacs and TrueBeams show large differences in detector-reading ratios for fields smaller than 1 cm x 1 cm.

  • 2.
    Kaveckyte, Vaiva
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Malusek, Alexandr
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Benmakhlouf, Hamza
    Karolinska Univ Hosp, Sweden.
    Alm Carlsson, Gudrun
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Surgery, Orthopaedics and Cancer Treatment, Department of Radiation Physics.
    Carlsson Tedgren, Åsa
    Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Radiological Sciences. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Surgery, Orthopaedics and Cancer Treatment, Department of Radiation Physics.
    Suitability of microDiamond detectors for the determination of absorbed dose to water around high-dose-rate Ir-192 brachytherapy sources2018In: Medical physics (Lancaster), ISSN 0094-2405, Vol. 45, no 1, p. 429-437Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Purpose: Experimental dosimetry of high-dose-rate (HDR) Ir-192 brachytherapy (BT) sources is complicated due to high dose and dose-rate gradients, and softening of photon energy spectrum with depth. A single crystal synthetic diamond detector microDiamond (PTW 60019, Freiburg, Germany) has a small active volume, high sensitivity, direct readout, and nearly water-equivalent active volume. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the suitability of microDiamond detectors for the determination of absorbed dose to water around HDR Ir-192 BT sources. Three microDiamond detectors were used, allowing for the comparison of their properties. Methods: In-phantom measurements were performed using microSelectron and VariSource iX HDR Ir-192 BT treatment units. Their treatment planning systems (TPSs), Oncentra (v. 4.3) and BrachyVision (v. 13.6), respectively, were used to create irradiation plans for a cubic PMMA phantom with the microDiamond positioned at one of three source-to-detector distances (SDDs) (1.5, 2.5, and 5.5 cm) at a time. The source was stepped in increments of 0.5 cm over a total length of 6 cm to yield absorbed dose of 2 Gy at the nominal reference-point of the detector. Detectors were calibrated in Co-60 beam in terms of absorbed dose to water, and Monte Carlo (MC) calculated beam quality correction factors were applied to account for absorbed-dose energy dependence. Phantom correction factors were applied to account for differences in dimensions between the measurement phantom and a water phantom used for absorbed dose calculations made with a TPS. The same measurements were made with all three of the detectors. Additionally, dose-rate dependence and stability of the detectors were evaluated in Co-60 beam. Results: The percentage differences between experimentally determined and TPS-calculated absorbed doses to water were from -1.3% to +2.9%. The values agreed to within experimental uncertainties, which were from 1.9% to 4.3% (k = 2) depending on the detector, SDD and treatment delivery unit. No dose-rate or intrinsic energy dependence corrections were applied. All microDiamonds were comparable in terms of preirradiation dose, stability of the readings and energy response, and showed a good agreement. Conclusions: The results indicate that the microDiamond is potentially suitable for the determination of absorbed dose to water around HDR Ir-192 BT sources and may be used for independent verification of TPSs calculations, as well as for QA measurements of HDR Ir-192 BT treatment delivery units at clinical sites. (C) 2017 American Association of Physicists in Medicine

  • 3.
    Kaveckyte, Vaiva
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Diagnostics and Specialist Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Karolinska Univ Hosp, Sweden.
    Persson, Linda
    Swedish Radiat Safety Author, Sweden.
    Malusek, Alexandr
    Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Diagnostics and Specialist Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences.
    Benmakhlouf, Hamza
    Karolinska Univ Hosp, Sweden.
    Alm Carlsson, Gudrun
    Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Diagnostics and Specialist Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Surgery, Orthopaedics and Cancer Treatment, Department of Radiation Physics.
    Carlsson Tedgren, Åsa
    Linköping University, Department of Health, Medicine and Caring Sciences, Division of Diagnostics and Specialist Medicine. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Region Östergötland, Center for Surgery, Orthopaedics and Cancer Treatment, Department of Radiation Physics. Karolinska Univ Hosp, Sweden.
    Investigation of a synthetic diamond detector response in kilovoltage photon beams2020In: Medical physics (Lancaster), ISSN 0094-2405Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Purpose An important characteristic of radiation dosimetry detectors is their energy response which consists of absorbed-dose and intrinsic energy responses. The former can be characterized using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations, whereas the latter (i.e., detector signal per absorbed dose to detector) is extracted from experimental data. Such a characterization is especially relevant when detectors are used in nonrelative measurements at a beam quality that differs from the calibration beam quality. Having in mind the possible application of synthetic diamond detectors (microDiamond PTW 60019, Freiburg, Germany) for nonrelative dosimetry of low-energy brachytherapy (BT) beams, we determined their intrinsic and absorbed-dose energy responses in 25-250 kV beams relative to a Co-60 beam, which is usually the reference beam quality for detector calibration in radiotherapy. Material and Methods Three microDiamond detectors and, for comparison, two silicon diodes (PTW 60017) were calibrated in terms of air-kerma free in air in six x-ray beam qualities (from 25 to 250 kV) and in terms of absorbed dose to water in a Co-60 beam at the national metrology laboratory in Sweden. The PENELOPE/penEasy MC radiation transport code was used to calculate the absorbed-dose energy response of the detectors (modeled based on blueprints) relative to air and water depending on calibration conditions. The MC results were used to extract the relative intrinsic energy response of the detectors from the overall energy response. Measurements using an independent setup with a single ophthalmic BEBIG I25.S16 I-125 BT seed (effective photon energy of 28 keV) were used as a qualitative check of the extracted intrinsic energy response correction factors. Additionally, the impact of the thickness of the active volume as well as the presence of extra-cameral components on the absorbed-dose energy response of a microDiamond detector was studied using MC simulations. Results The relative intrinsic energy response of the microDiamond detectors was higher by a factor of 2 in 25 and 50 kV beams compared to the Co-60 beam. The variation in the relative intrinsic energy response of silicon diodes was within 10% over the investigated photon energy range. The use of relative intrinsic energy response correction factors improved the agreement among the absorbed dose to water values determined using microDiamond detectors and silicon diodes, as well as with the TG-43 formalism-based calculations for the I-125 seed. MC study of microDiamond detector design features provided a possible explanation for inter-detector response variation at low-energy photon beams by differences in the effective thickness of the active volume. Conclusions MicroDiamond detectors had a non-negligible variation in the relative intrinsic energy response (factor of 2) which was comparable to that in the absorbed-dose energy response relative to water at low-energy photon beams. Silicon diodes, in contrast, had an absorbed-dose energy dependence on photon energy that varied by a factor of 6, whereas the intrinsic energy dependence on beam quality was within 10%. It is important to decouple these two responses for a full characterization of detector energy response especially when the user and reference beam qualities differ significantly, and MC alone is not enough.

    The full text will be freely available from 2020-12-27 08:12
1 - 3 of 3
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf