1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Clinical application of radiophotoluminescent glass dosimeter for dose verification of prostate HDR procedure
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.3005478
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/35/12/10.1118/1.3005478
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/35/12/10.1118/1.3005478

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Schematic of a GD-302M glass dosimeter. On the left hand side (marked “123” in the figure) is the serial number end. The readout area is on the opposite end, in length. The diameter of the incident laser beam is .

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

(a), (b) Front and lateral views of the in-house prostate water phantom. Geometrical configurations of MCNP simulations indicate the misplacement of dosimeters vertically ( axis) and (c) horizontally ( axis) (d), where represents dosimeter; represents source. (e) Dosimeter locations for single source dwell position. TLDs or RPLGDs are placed in PMMA tubes, Nos. 1–8. (f) Dosimeter locations for multiple source dwell positions. Three dosimeters were placed inside each of the five PMMA tubes, the rest of the 12 PMMA tubes were for placing the radiation sources. Source dwell positions and dwell times were determined by the treatment planning system.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

Source is located at the central PMMA tube. is given to the outer ring of the phantom (see arrow), the 100% isodose curve.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

The reproducibility study for GD-302M glass dosimeters and rod TLD-100 dosimeters readout. The relative response is the variation among the individual dosimeter and is the individual reading divided by the average of the 50 readings. The error bars represent one standard deviation of six measurements.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Linearity study of the GD-302M glass dosimeter and the rod TLD-100. The coefficients of variation for each dosimeter were less than 3%.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Energy response curves for the GD-302M and the rod TLD-100. The coefficients of variation of each dosimeter were less than 3%.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

MCNP simulations of the effects of the dose deviation by misplacing the dosimeter in vertical and horizontal directions. The MCNP calculation errors are within 2%.

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

The measured dose and TPS calculated results for single source dwell position.

Generic image for table
TABLE III.

The measured doses and calculated results for multiple source dwell positions. The rod TLD dosimeter is not sensitive enough to measure the dose at high dose gradient positions. (Its spatial resolution is inadequate.)

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/35/12/10.1118/1.3005478
2008-11-14
2014-04-25
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Clinical application of radiophotoluminescent glass dosimeter for dose verification of prostate HDR procedure
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/35/12/10.1118/1.3005478
10.1118/1.3005478
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM