2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.jksus.2016.09.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of the dosimetric characteristics of 6 MV flattened and unflattened photon beam

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…6 Also, Monte Carlo (MC) studies have shown that the fluence of contamination electrons is greater in FFF beams, which contributes further to the rise in superficial dose. 7,8 Published studies have demonstrated an increase in mean energy at the surface and superficial dose for standard C-arm linacs in FFF mode in both MC simulations 7,8 and commissioning beam data. 5,9 Another important consequence of the Halcyon design that may affect superficial dose is the presence of the bore cover in the beam path, which may act like a beam spoiler increasing the superficial dose to the patient.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6 Also, Monte Carlo (MC) studies have shown that the fluence of contamination electrons is greater in FFF beams, which contributes further to the rise in superficial dose. 7,8 Published studies have demonstrated an increase in mean energy at the surface and superficial dose for standard C-arm linacs in FFF mode in both MC simulations 7,8 and commissioning beam data. 5,9 Another important consequence of the Halcyon design that may affect superficial dose is the presence of the bore cover in the beam path, which may act like a beam spoiler increasing the superficial dose to the patient.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, the flatness of each depth was approximately 9–13%, which was high owing to the flattening filter‐free (FFF) beam characteristics. The penumbra was not sufficiently steep in this case compared to the existing commercial equipment owing to differences in the focal spot size, jaw, and MLC tip shape, which will be compensated for by improving this aspect in future work 34 …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our obtained relative surface dose of the flat 6 MV beam line tended to decrease by about 21% (22%) for 10×10 cm 2 (20×20 cm 2 ) field size when the flattening filter was removed from the beam line. Contrarily, the Mohammed et al [41] showed an increase in relative surface dose by about 19% (12%) for 10×10 cm 2 (20×20 cm 2 ) field size by removing the flattening filter from a Varian 2100 linac. For the Siemens FFF, our results converge with the results of Sigamani and Nambiray [3] who evaluated the buildup region and surface dose the Siemens Artiste 7MV-FFF and 6MV flattened photon beams using GafChromic film and two different dosimeters.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%