Tarafder Shameem, Nick Bennie, Martin Butson, David Thwaites
{"title":"A comparison between EPSON V700 and EPSON V800 scanners for film dosimetry.","authors":"Tarafder Shameem, Nick Bennie, Martin Butson, David Thwaites","doi":"10.1007/s13246-019-00837-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Radiochromic film is a good dosimeter choice for patient QA for complex treatment techniques (IMRT, VMAT, SABR, SBRT) because of its near tissue equivalency, very high spatial resolution and established method of use. Commercial scanners are usually used for film dosimetry, among which EPSON scanners are the most common. NCCI have used an EPSON V700 scanner, but recently acquired a new model EPSON V800 scanner. The purpose of this work was to evaluate any differences between these two scanners to consider whether they can be used interchangeably or not. Different aspects of film dosimetry, e.g. lateral response artefact (LRA) effect, orientation effect, scanner response etc., were compared. EBT3 films were irradiated with 40 × 40 cm<sup>2</sup> field size 6 MV beams and scanned in both the scanners. The scanned images were read in ImageJ V1.49 software. The data obtained was then copied in MS Excel to compare the scanners. The V800 scanner causes more polarisation, which results in more LRA effect than for the V700 scanner. The responses of the scanners in all three colour channels are not the same for the same film and irradiation. The V800 scanner shows an increase of response of up to 1.6% compared to 3.7% increase in the V700 scanner after scanning a piece of irradiated film 20 times. The scanners cannot be used interchangeably. The correction factors for LRA effect and the calibration curves are different. Further characterisation, evaluation and commissioning is required before clinical use.</p>","PeriodicalId":55430,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-019-00837-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Radiochromic film is a good dosimeter choice for patient QA for complex treatment techniques (IMRT, VMAT, SABR, SBRT) because of its near tissue equivalency, very high spatial resolution and established method of use. Commercial scanners are usually used for film dosimetry, among which EPSON scanners are the most common. NCCI have used an EPSON V700 scanner, but recently acquired a new model EPSON V800 scanner. The purpose of this work was to evaluate any differences between these two scanners to consider whether they can be used interchangeably or not. Different aspects of film dosimetry, e.g. lateral response artefact (LRA) effect, orientation effect, scanner response etc., were compared. EBT3 films were irradiated with 40 × 40 cm2 field size 6 MV beams and scanned in both the scanners. The scanned images were read in ImageJ V1.49 software. The data obtained was then copied in MS Excel to compare the scanners. The V800 scanner causes more polarisation, which results in more LRA effect than for the V700 scanner. The responses of the scanners in all three colour channels are not the same for the same film and irradiation. The V800 scanner shows an increase of response of up to 1.6% compared to 3.7% increase in the V700 scanner after scanning a piece of irradiated film 20 times. The scanners cannot be used interchangeably. The correction factors for LRA effect and the calibration curves are different. Further characterisation, evaluation and commissioning is required before clinical use.
期刊介绍:
Australasian Physical & Engineering Sciences in Medicine (APESM) is a multidisciplinary forum for information and research on the application of physics and engineering to medicine and human physiology. APESM covers a broad range of topics that include but is not limited to:
- Medical physics in radiotherapy
- Medical physics in diagnostic radiology
- Medical physics in nuclear medicine
- Mathematical modelling applied to medicine and human biology
- Clinical biomedical engineering
- Feature extraction, classification of EEG, ECG, EMG, EOG, and other biomedical signals;
- Medical imaging - contributions to new and improved methods;
- Modelling of physiological systems
- Image processing to extract information from images, e.g. fMRI, CT, etc.;
- Biomechanics, especially with applications to orthopaedics.
- Nanotechnology in medicine
APESM offers original reviews, scientific papers, scientific notes, technical papers, educational notes, book reviews and letters to the editor.
APESM is the journal of the Australasian College of Physical Scientists and Engineers in Medicine, and also the official journal of the College of Biomedical Engineers, Engineers Australia and the Asia-Oceania Federation of Organizations for Medical Physics.