2021
DOI: 10.1007/s00411-020-00887-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effective energy assessment during breast cancer intraoperative radiotherapy by low-energy X-rays: A Monte Carlo study

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In treatment plans consisting of entirely steep gradients (brachytherapy, stereotactic radiosurgery, IORT), the use of similar tolerance in dose and distance is misleading, since most points will fail on distance not dose (magnitude). Therefore, asymmetric tolerances of 7% in dose difference and 0.5 mm in distance‐to‐agreement were chosen to compute the gamma for the steep gradient of INTRABEAM dose distributions 3,11,28,43 . A solution would be accepted if at least 95% of the voxels pass the gamma evaluation with respect to the reference dose, with a threshold set at 5% of the maximum dose D max 33 …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In treatment plans consisting of entirely steep gradients (brachytherapy, stereotactic radiosurgery, IORT), the use of similar tolerance in dose and distance is misleading, since most points will fail on distance not dose (magnitude). Therefore, asymmetric tolerances of 7% in dose difference and 0.5 mm in distance‐to‐agreement were chosen to compute the gamma for the steep gradient of INTRABEAM dose distributions 3,11,28,43 . A solution would be accepted if at least 95% of the voxels pass the gamma evaluation with respect to the reference dose, with a threshold set at 5% of the maximum dose D max 33 …”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, asymmetric tolerances of 7% in dose difference and 0.5 mm in distance-to-agreement were chosen to compute the gamma for the steep gradient of INTRABEAM dose distributions. 3,11,28,43 A solution would be accepted if at least 95% of the voxels pass the gamma evaluation with respect to the reference dose, with a threshold set at 5% of the maximum dose D max . 33…”
Section: F I G U R Ementioning
confidence: 99%
“…A more objective means of defining and reporting breast density is likely a critical component of any attempt to accurately relate these metrics. Additionally, given the ability of breast tissue composition to effect RBE values of low-energy x-rays during TARGIT-IORT, more objective breast density calculations may also allow for correction of variations in prescribed dose for patients with differing breast densities who undergo TARGIT-IORT ( 21 ). In summary, a better understanding of breast density as a tenet of risk stratification for patients undergoing TARGIT-IORT is an area that warrants further investigation.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Intrabeam core system contains the PRS 500 control console and XRS 4 X-ray source. The control console supplies a low DC voltage to the X-ray source, which generates a high voltage to direct the electron beam into the probe [ 19 ]. The X-ray generator body (7 cm × 11 cm × 11 cm) attaches to a floor stand which allows for six degrees of freedom to treat various sites of a patient’s body [ 2 ].…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The spherical applicators were made of a biocompatible polyetherimide thermoplastic (GE ULTEM 1000) [ 16 ], C 37 H 24 O 6 N 2 , with a density of 1.27 g/cm 3 [ 19 ]. Within the applicators was a hollow region of air; this was where the probe was inserted.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%