skip to main content

Title: Multi-institutional dosimetric and geometric commissioning of image-guided small animal irradiators

Purpose: To compare the dosimetric and geometric properties of a commercial x-ray based image-guided small animal irradiation system, installed at three institutions and to establish a complete and broadly accessible commissioning procedure. Methods: The system consists of a 225 kVp x-ray tube with fixed field size collimators ranging from 1 to 44 mm equivalent diameter. The x-ray tube is mounted opposite a flat-panel imaging detector, on a C-arm gantry with 360° coplanar rotation. Each institution performed a full commissioning of their system, including half-value layer, absolute dosimetry, relative dosimetry (profiles, percent depth dose, and relative output factors), and characterization of the system geometry and mechanical flex of the x-ray tube and detector. Dosimetric measurements were made using Farmer-type ionization chambers, small volume air and liquid ionization chambers, and radiochromic film. The results between the three institutions were compared. Results: At 225 kVp, with 0.3 mm Cu added filtration, the first half value layer ranged from 0.9 to 1.0 mm Cu. The dose-rate in-air for a 40 × 40 mm{sup 2} field size, at a source-to-axis distance of 30 cm, ranged from 3.5 to 3.9 Gy/min between the three institutions. For field sizes between 2.5 mm diameter and 40 × 40 mm{supmore » 2}, the differences between percent depth dose curves up to depths of 3.5 cm were between 1% and 4% on average, with the maximum difference being 7%. The profiles agreed very well for fields >5 mm diameter. The relative output factors differed by up to 6% for fields larger than 10 mm diameter, but differed by up to 49% for fields ≤5 mm diameter. The mechanical characteristics of the system (source-to-axis and source-to-detector distances) were consistent between all three institutions. There were substantial differences in the flex of each system. Conclusions: With the exception of the half-value layer, and mechanical properties, there were significant differences between the dosimetric and geometric properties of the three systems. This underscores the need for careful commissioning of each individual system for use in radiobiological experiments.« less
Authors:
 [1] ; ; ;  [2] ;  [3] ;  [4] ;  [5] ;  [6] ;  [7] ; ; ;  [8] ;  [2] ;  [6] ;  [5] ;  [6] ;  [6]
  1. Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M5G 2M9, Canada and Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 1A1 (Canada)
  2. Department of Radiation Oncology (MAASTRO), GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht 6201 BN (Netherlands)
  3. Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam (Netherlands)
  4. Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M5G 2M9, Canada and Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam (Netherlands)
  5. Radiation Medicine Program, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M5G 2M9 (Canada)
  6. (Canada)
  7. (United States)
  8. Department of Radiation Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066 CX Amsterdam (Netherlands)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22250938
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 41; Journal Issue: 3; Other Information: (c) 2014 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; COLLIMATORS; COMMISSIONING; DEPTH DOSE DISTRIBUTIONS; DOSE RATES; DOSIMETRY; FARMS; IMAGES; IRRADIATION; LIQUID IONIZATION CHAMBERS; MECHANICAL PROPERTIES; X RADIATION; X-RAY TUBES