Proton and Carbon Ion Beam Spot Size Measurement Using 5 Different Detector Types.

IF 2.1 Q3 ONCOLOGY
International Journal of Particle Therapy Pub Date : 2024-12-13 eCollection Date: 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1016/j.ijpt.2024.100638
Matthias Witt, Uli Weber, Sebastian Adeberg, Kilian-Simon Baumann, Klemens Zink
{"title":"Proton and Carbon Ion Beam Spot Size Measurement Using 5 Different Detector Types.","authors":"Matthias Witt, Uli Weber, Sebastian Adeberg, Kilian-Simon Baumann, Klemens Zink","doi":"10.1016/j.ijpt.2024.100638","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The spot size of scanned particle beams is of crucial importance for the correct dose delivery and, therefore, plays a significant role in the quality assurance (QA) of pencil beam scanning ion beam therapy.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>This study compares 5 detector types-radiochromic film, ionization chamber (IC) array, flat panel detector, multiwire chamber, and IC-for measuring the spot size of proton and carbon ion beams.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Variations of up to 30% were found between detectors, underscoring the impact of detector choice on QA outcomes. The multiwire chamber consistently measured the smallest spot sizes, attributed to its intrinsic calculation model, while the IC array yielded larger spot sizes due to volume-averaging effects. These discrepancies highlight the necessity of selecting detectors based on QA needs, such as measurement speed, spatial resolution, and data acquisition methods. Digital detectors offer advantages over film-based ones by automating data processing, reducing manual errors, and providing immediate results.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The study concludes that, although a single Gaussian fit is generally sufficient for QA, more sophisticated models might be beneficial for special applications. These findings aim to guide detector selection for ion beam facilities, enhancing QA procedures.</p>","PeriodicalId":36923,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Particle Therapy","volume":"15 ","pages":"100638"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11732072/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Particle Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpt.2024.100638","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: The spot size of scanned particle beams is of crucial importance for the correct dose delivery and, therefore, plays a significant role in the quality assurance (QA) of pencil beam scanning ion beam therapy.

Materials and methods: This study compares 5 detector types-radiochromic film, ionization chamber (IC) array, flat panel detector, multiwire chamber, and IC-for measuring the spot size of proton and carbon ion beams.

Results: Variations of up to 30% were found between detectors, underscoring the impact of detector choice on QA outcomes. The multiwire chamber consistently measured the smallest spot sizes, attributed to its intrinsic calculation model, while the IC array yielded larger spot sizes due to volume-averaging effects. These discrepancies highlight the necessity of selecting detectors based on QA needs, such as measurement speed, spatial resolution, and data acquisition methods. Digital detectors offer advantages over film-based ones by automating data processing, reducing manual errors, and providing immediate results.

Conclusion: The study concludes that, although a single Gaussian fit is generally sufficient for QA, more sophisticated models might be beneficial for special applications. These findings aim to guide detector selection for ion beam facilities, enhancing QA procedures.

用5种不同类型的探测器测量质子和碳离子束光斑尺寸。
目的:扫描粒子束的光斑大小对正确给药至关重要,因此在铅笔束扫描离子束治疗的质量保证(QA)中起着重要作用。材料和方法:本研究比较了5种探测器类型:放射性变色膜、电离室阵列、平板探测器、多线室和IC,用于测量质子和碳离子束的光斑大小。结果:探测器之间的差异高达30%,强调了探测器选择对QA结果的影响。由于其固有的计算模型,多线室始终测量到最小的光斑尺寸,而IC阵列由于体积平均效应而产生更大的光斑尺寸。这些差异突出了基于QA需求选择检测器的必要性,例如测量速度、空间分辨率和数据采集方法。数字探测器通过自动化数据处理、减少人工错误和提供即时结果,比基于胶片的探测器具有优势。结论:该研究得出结论,尽管单个高斯拟合通常足以用于QA,但更复杂的模型可能对特殊应用有益。这些发现旨在指导离子束设施的探测器选择,提高质量保证程序。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
International Journal of Particle Therapy
International Journal of Particle Therapy Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.90%
发文量
23
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信