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.
Co-60 tomotherapy: A treatment planning investigation
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1118/1.3533668
/content/aapm/journal/medphys/38/2/10.1118/1.3533668
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/38/2/10.1118/1.3533668

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

Custom profiles created for the 2 cm (solid) and 2.8 cm (dashed) diameter cylindrical sources.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

Scaled version of the MLC and source configuration used to make the profile measurements in Sec. II A. Note that for points away from the beam centerline, a decreasing amount of the source is seen from the profile plane because of the narrowing gap formed by the top and bottom of the MLC leaf opening.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

The calculated (dashed) and measured (solid) profiles for one and four, 0.625 cm wide MLC leaf openings.

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

The calculated profiles for a 1 cm MLC leaf opening using the Gaussian source modeling parameter in PINNACLE (dashed lines) and custom source profiles (solid lines). Gaussian standard deviation values were chosen to provide the same FWHM as the custom source profiles (0.68 and 0.97 cm for the 2.0 and 2.8 cm diameter sources, respectively).

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Profiles for sequential and simultaneous leaf openings with the 2.0 cm Co-60 source. In each figure the fine black lines represent adjacent single leaf openings and the heavier black line the profile are obtained by superimposing the adjacent single leaf opening profiles. The gray lines are measured profiles for leaves opened simultaneously and the dashed black lines are the sequential leaf profiles multiplied by the factor given in the legend.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

Grayscale images depicting the thread effect simulated in PINNACLE with a 30 cm diameter cylindrical phantom and open fan beams of 4.8 cm slice width and a pitch of 0.5. Each beam has the same Co-60 beam parameters except the source size increases from 0.1 cm FWHM in (a) to 2.0 cm and 2.8 cm diameter cylindrical sources in (b) and (c), respectively. Dual-slice delivery with the 2.0 cm diameter source is shown in (d).

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Prostate patient DVH results for the segmental IMRT plan (solid lines) and Co-60 tomotherapy plan with a 2.0 cm diameter source (dashed lines).

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

H&N patient DVH results for the segmental IMRT plan (solid lines) and Co-60 tomotherapy with a 2.0 cm diameter source (dashed lines).

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

Brain patient DVH results for the segmental IMRT plan (solid lines) and Co-60 tomotherapy with a 2.0 cm diameter source (dashed lines).

Image of FIG. 10.
FIG. 10.

Brain patient DVH results for the Co-60 tomotherapy plan with a 2.0 cm diameter source (solid lines) and a 2.8 cm diameter source (dashed lines).

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Treatment times for the three clinical cases planned delivered with segmental IMRT and Co-60 tomotherapy with 2.0 cm cylindrical source. Dual-slice treatment times are also estimated for the 2.0 cm diameter source.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aapm/journal/medphys/38/2/10.1118/1.3533668
2011-01-07
2014-04-24
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Co-60 tomotherapy: A treatment planning investigation
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aapm/journal/medphys/38/2/10.1118/1.3533668
10.1118/1.3533668
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM