探讨了EBT-XD薄膜剂量法标定时背景像素值的选择方法。

Q4 Medicine
Precision Radiation Oncology Pub Date : 2024-08-11 eCollection Date: 2024-09-01 DOI:10.1002/pro6.1236
Sathiya Raj, Nithya Shree, Ganesh Kadirampatti
{"title":"探讨了EBT-XD薄膜剂量法标定时背景像素值的选择方法。","authors":"Sathiya Raj, Nithya Shree, Ganesh Kadirampatti","doi":"10.1002/pro6.1236","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study investigates three different calibration methods for the selection of background pixel intensity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Film-by-Film (FBF) Method: Each film serves as its own control. Batch-by-Film (BBF) Method: A single film is used as a control for all calibration films. Generic (GEN) Method: A generic value (65535) is used as the background pixel value for all calibration films.Three calibration curves were established for the red, green, blue, and RGB channels, and the Radbard NIH (image) curve-fitting model was used to predict the dose. Sensitivity at different dose levels was quantified by calculating the first derivative of each color channel.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The GEN method exhibited a difference of up to 6% between the predicted and delivered doses below 2 Gy. The changes in optical density when using the GEN method differed significantly (<i>p</i><0.0001) from those of the FBF and BBF methods. In the dose range 5-30 Gy, the percentage difference between the predicted and delivered doses for the FBF, BBF, and GEN methods was within 2%. Both the red and green channels demonstrated higher sensitivity than the blue channel over the dose range of 2-30 Gy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The FBF method is more accurate than the BBF and GEN methods because it accounts for inter-film variations. The Radbard NIH (image) curve-fitting function proved suitable for predicting the dose for all the three calibration methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":32406,"journal":{"name":"Precision Radiation Oncology","volume":"8 3","pages":"132-137"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11935016/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigating the method of selection of background pixel values for the calibration of EBT-XD film dosimetry.\",\"authors\":\"Sathiya Raj, Nithya Shree, Ganesh Kadirampatti\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pro6.1236\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study investigates three different calibration methods for the selection of background pixel intensity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Film-by-Film (FBF) Method: Each film serves as its own control. Batch-by-Film (BBF) Method: A single film is used as a control for all calibration films. Generic (GEN) Method: A generic value (65535) is used as the background pixel value for all calibration films.Three calibration curves were established for the red, green, blue, and RGB channels, and the Radbard NIH (image) curve-fitting model was used to predict the dose. Sensitivity at different dose levels was quantified by calculating the first derivative of each color channel.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The GEN method exhibited a difference of up to 6% between the predicted and delivered doses below 2 Gy. The changes in optical density when using the GEN method differed significantly (<i>p</i><0.0001) from those of the FBF and BBF methods. In the dose range 5-30 Gy, the percentage difference between the predicted and delivered doses for the FBF, BBF, and GEN methods was within 2%. Both the red and green channels demonstrated higher sensitivity than the blue channel over the dose range of 2-30 Gy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The FBF method is more accurate than the BBF and GEN methods because it accounts for inter-film variations. The Radbard NIH (image) curve-fitting function proved suitable for predicting the dose for all the three calibration methods.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":32406,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Precision Radiation Oncology\",\"volume\":\"8 3\",\"pages\":\"132-137\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11935016/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Precision Radiation Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pro6.1236\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Precision Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pro6.1236","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:研究背景像元强度选择的三种不同标定方法。方法:逐片法(film -by- film, FBF):每片片作为自己的控制。按膜分批(BBF)方法:使用单个膜作为所有校准膜的对照。通用(GEN)方法:使用通用值(65535)作为所有校准胶片的背景像素值。建立红、绿、蓝、RGB通道3条校准曲线,采用Radbard NIH(图像)曲线拟合模型预测剂量。通过计算每个颜色通道的一阶导数来量化不同剂量水平下的灵敏度。结果:GEN方法在2 Gy以下的预测剂量和实际剂量之间的差异高达6%。结论:FBF法比BBF法和GEN法更准确,因为它考虑了膜间的变化。Radbard NIH(图)曲线拟合函数对三种校准方法的剂量预测均适用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Investigating the method of selection of background pixel values for the calibration of EBT-XD film dosimetry.

Purpose: This study investigates three different calibration methods for the selection of background pixel intensity.

Methods: Film-by-Film (FBF) Method: Each film serves as its own control. Batch-by-Film (BBF) Method: A single film is used as a control for all calibration films. Generic (GEN) Method: A generic value (65535) is used as the background pixel value for all calibration films.Three calibration curves were established for the red, green, blue, and RGB channels, and the Radbard NIH (image) curve-fitting model was used to predict the dose. Sensitivity at different dose levels was quantified by calculating the first derivative of each color channel.

Results: The GEN method exhibited a difference of up to 6% between the predicted and delivered doses below 2 Gy. The changes in optical density when using the GEN method differed significantly (p<0.0001) from those of the FBF and BBF methods. In the dose range 5-30 Gy, the percentage difference between the predicted and delivered doses for the FBF, BBF, and GEN methods was within 2%. Both the red and green channels demonstrated higher sensitivity than the blue channel over the dose range of 2-30 Gy.

Conclusions: The FBF method is more accurate than the BBF and GEN methods because it accounts for inter-film variations. The Radbard NIH (image) curve-fitting function proved suitable for predicting the dose for all the three calibration methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Precision Radiation Oncology
Precision Radiation Oncology Medicine-Oncology
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
32
审稿时长
13 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信