Dear Authors,
If you believe that your paper was mistakenly rejected by other leading journals and you do not agree with final decision, the editors of Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy offer new fast track review. You may submit your manuscript to Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy together with all prior peer-reviews obtained from the other journal and your rebuttal letter. We guarantee review based decision within 72 hours from the time we will receive your manuscript.

Fast track submission process: Please submit the manuscript with all reviews and rebuttal letter by email to Dr. Michal Masternak (michal.masternak@ucf.edu) for fast review processing. To assure immediate attention the email title must to include: RPOR-fast track- Last Name First Name (of corresponding author).

Volume 22, Number 6, 2017

Validation of Dosimetric Leaf Gap (DLG) prior to its implementation in Treatment Planning System (TPS): TrueBeam™ millennium 120 leaf MLC

Ravindra Shende, Ganesh Patel

Summary:

Aim

Objective of present study is to determine optimum value of DLG and its validation prior to being incorporated in TPS for Varian TrueBeam™ millennium 120 leaves MLC.

Background

Partial transmission through the rounded leaf ends of the Multi Leaf Collimator (MLC) causes a conflict between the edges of the light field and radiation field. Parameter account for this partial transmission is called Dosimetric Leaf Gap (DLG). The complex high precession technique, such as Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT), entails the modeling of optimum value of DLG inside Eclipse Treatment Planning System (TPS) for precise dose calculation.

Materials and methods

Distinct synchronized uniformed extension of sweeping dynamic MLC leaf gap fields created by Varian MLC shaper software were use to determine DLG. DLG measurements performed with both 0.13 cc semi-flex ionization chamber and 2D-Array I-Matrix were used to validate the DLG; similarly, values of DLG from TPS were estimated from predicted dose. Similar mathematical approaches were employed to determine DLG from delivered and TPS predicted dose. DLG determined from delivered dose measured with both ionization chamber (DLGIon) and I-Matrix (DLGI-Matrix) compared with DLG estimate from TPS predicted dose (DLGTPS). Measurements were carried out for all available 6MV, 10MV, 15MV, 6MVFFF and 10MVFFF beam energies.

Results

Maximum and minimum DLG deviation between measured and TPS calculated DLG was found to be 0.2 mm and 0.1 mm, respectively. Both of the measured DLGs (DLGIon and DLGI-Matrix) were found to be in a very good agreement with estimated DLG from TPS (DLGTPS).

Conclusions

Proposed method proved to be helpful in verifying and validating the DLG value prior to its clinical implementation in TPS.

Signature: Rep Pract Oncol Radiother, 2017; 22(6) : 485-494


« back

 
INDEXED IN:

Indexed in: EMBASE®, the Excerpta Medica database, the Elsevier BIOBASE (Current Awareness in Biological Sciences) and in the Index Copernicus.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/15071367/19/2