In vivo isocenter dose in two hip prosthesis patients

Feasibility of concurrent treatment with the scanning ultrasound reflector linear array system (SURLAS) and the helical tomotherapy system

“…In addition, by carefully selecting the position of the SURLAS with respect to the longitudinal axis of the patient, a dosimetric advantage may be possible in terms of reducing dose to the OAR (see table 4). Studies in patients treated for cancer where the radiation beam passes through a steel or titanium hip prosthesis have shown that there is dose variation at the interface between tissue and the prosthesis which is not predicted by the radiation therapy planning station [40–42]. Proper beam technique modifications are recommended to avoid the metallic prosthesis [40, 41].…”

Dose attenuation effect of hip prostheses in a 9-MV photon beam: commercial treatment planning system versus Monte Carlo calculations

“…4 However, limitations of the treatment planning systems in modeling the charged particle production and photon scattering of different materials can cause considerable errors in the dose calculations. 2,3,[5][6][7][8][9][10] In a study by Carolan et al on a hip prosthesis made of cobalt-chromium alloy, a dose reduction of 34% was reported for the target volume in the shadow of the prosthesis, 2 whereas for a titanium hip prosthesis the dose reduction has been reported to be approximately 10%. 8 Newly developed treatment planning systems (TPSs) based on the collapsed cone and Monte Carlo methods have shown better accuracy in predicting the received dose at points within and beyond the metal implants.…”

“…All calculations were performed with cubes made of titanium (r = 4.5 g/cm 3 ), Co-Cr-Mo (r = 7.8 g/cm 3 ) and steel (r = 8.1 g/cm 3 ) materials according to the published data. [1][2][3][4][5][6][7] For MC calculations, the atomic numbers and densities of alls elements were entered in an MCNP input fi le. However, it was not possible to use the atomic numbers of the prostheses for TPS calculations, and only the electron density of the materials relative to water was the infl uencing factor in the TPS calculations for the different implants.…”

The impacts of dental filling materials on RapidArc treatment planning and dose delivery: Challenges and solution

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10] The impact of the metallic streaking artifact correction on Monte Carlo (MC) dose calculation was studied by Bazalova et al 11 They found that not correcting for streaking artifacts in MC planning systems will lead to large dose calculation errors and the potential mistreatment of patients. Reft et al 12 (AAPM task group 63) and Burleson et al 13 reported that the perturbations of the dose distribution by a hip prosthesis when treating pelvic malignancies can result in unacceptable variations in dosage within the target volume. Radiation dose perturbation at tissue-titanium interfaces and gold dental fillings in patients with head and neck cancers have been discussed in various studies.…”