Validation of OSLD and a treatment planning system for surface dose determination in IMRT treatments

Zhuang, Audrey H.; Olch, Arthur J.

doi:10.1118/1.4890795

Cited by 42 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The uncertainty for the less controlled scenario also assumes that the OSLD is irradiated from a variety of angles but that no angular dependence correction factor is applied. The estimated uncertainty here is consistent with that reported from clinical irradiations …”

Section: Dose Calculation Formalismssupporting

confidence: 90%

“…As conditions become more complicated or less tightly controlled, uncertainty in the measurements increases. In phantom measurements [using 3D and IMRT treatments], Zhuang and Olch achieved agreement typically within ±3% between measurement and TPS calculation using a high‐accuracy OSLD technique and a carefully tailored TPS beam model. This precision is consistent with the optimal precision shown in Table for high‐accuracy use of this detector in a “less controlled” setting.…”

Section: Specific Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

AAPM TG 191: Clinical use of luminescent dosimeters: TLDs and OSLDs

Kry

Alvarez

Cygler³

et al. 2019

Medical Physics

134

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD) and optically stimulated luminescent dosimeters (OSLD) are practical, accurate, and precise tools for point dosimetry in medical physics applications. The charges of Task Group 191 were to detail the methodologies for practical and optimal luminescence dosimetry in a clinical setting. This includes: (a) to review the variety of TLD/OSLD materials available, including features and limitations of each; (b) to outline the optimal steps to achieve accurate and precise dosimetry with luminescent detectors and to evaluate the uncertainty induced when less rigorous procedures are used; (c) to develop consensus guidelines on the optimal use of luminescent dosimeters for clinical practice; and (d) to develop guidelines for special medically relevant uses of TLDs/OSLDs such as mixed photon/neutron field dosimetry, particle beam dosimetry, and skin dosimetry. While this report provides general guidelines for TLD and OSLD processes, the report provides specific details for TLD‐100 and nanoDotTM dosimeters because of their prevalence in clinical practice.

show abstract

Section: Dose Calculation Formalismssupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Specific Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 96%

AAPM TG 191: Clinical use of luminescent dosimeters: TLDs and OSLDs

Kry

Alvarez

Cygler³

et al. 2019

Medical Physics

134

142

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, the EPM for a Landauer OSL was determined by Zhuang and Olch (11) to be

D_{OSL} = 0.8 mm

, and 0.07 cm 2 /gm by Reft (31) . The thickness of TLD100 was 0.38 mm (

ρ = 2.64 normalg / {cm}^{3}

); therefore, with the assumption that the EPM is located at the midpoint of the TLD, then

D_{TLD} = 0.5 mm

of water.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Regarding OSLs, most reports concentrate on the investigation of OSL characteristics and their response at

d_{ref}

or deeper (9) . Only a few have reported the use of OSLs in the buildup region for skin dose measurements 10 , 11 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surface dose measurements with commonly used detectors: a consistent thickness correction method

Reynolds

Higgins

2015

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to review application of a consistent correction method for the solid state detectors, such as thermoluminescent dosimeters (chips (cTLD) and powder (pTLD)), optically stimulated detectors (both closed (OSL) and open (eOSL)), and radiochromic (EBT2) and radiographic (EDR2) films. In addition, to compare measured surface dose using an extrapolation ionization chamber (PTW 30‐360) with other parallel plate chambers RMI‐449 (Attix), Capintec PS‐033, PTW 30‐329 (Markus) and Memorial. Measurements of surface dose for 6 MV photons with parallel plate chambers were used to establish a baseline. cTLD, OSLs, EDR2, and EBT2 measurements were corrected using a method which involved irradiation of three dosimeter stacks, followed by linear extrapolation of individual dosimeter measurements to zero thickness. We determined the magnitude of correction for each detector and compared our results against an alternative correction method based on effective thickness. All uncorrected surface dose measurements exhibited overresponse, compared with the extrapolation chamber data, except for the Attix chamber. The closest match was obtained with the Attix chamber (−0.1%), followed by pTLD (0.5%), Capintec (4.5%), Memorial (7.3%), Markus (10%), cTLD (11.8%), eOSL (12.8%), EBT2 (14%), EDR2 (14.8%), and OSL (26%). Application of published ionization chamber corrections brought all the parallel plate results to within 1% of the extrapolation chamber. The extrapolation method corrected all solid‐state detector results to within 2% of baseline, except the OSLs. Extrapolation of dose using a simple three‐detector stack has been demonstrated to provide thickness corrections for cTLD, eOSLs, EBT2, and EDR2 which can then be used for surface dose measurements. Standard OSLs are not recommended for surface dose measurement. The effective thickness method suffers from the subjectivity inherent in the inclusion of measured percentage depth‐dose curves and is not recommended for these types of measurements.PACS number: 87.56.‐v

show abstract

“…A dosimetria in vivo possibilita que problemas ocorridos durante a aplicação radioterápica sejam detectados. No CQ de IMRT, esse tipo de dosimetria pode ser realizada com a inserção de um detector na posição desejada (método invasivo) ou com detector posicionado a uma certa distância ou em contato com o paciente (método não invasivo) [12,33,34,35]. Diferentes detectores são usados para esta tarefa, sendo o EPID um dos mais práticos.…”

Section: Controle De Qualidade De Imrtunclassified

Desenvolvimento e avaliação de um sistema de cálculo de dose independente para controle de qualidade de IMRT do tipo jaws-only

Silva¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Validation of OSLD and a treatment planning system for surface dose determination in IMRT treatments

Cited by 42 publications

References 29 publications

AAPM TG 191: Clinical use of luminescent dosimeters: TLDs and OSLDs

AAPM TG 191: Clinical use of luminescent dosimeters: TLDs and OSLDs

Surface dose measurements with commonly used detectors: a consistent thickness correction method

Desenvolvimento e avaliação de um sistema de cálculo de dose independente para controle de qualidade de IMRT do tipo jaws-only

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About