SU‐E‐T‐222: Performance Comparison of In‐Vivo Dosimeters, including TLDs, MOSFETs, and OSLDs for Patients Receiving Total Body Irradiation

S. Pillai, Wolfram Laub, T. he

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Purpose: To compare accuracy of in vivo dosimeters such as TLDs, MOSFETs & OSLDs for patients receiving Total Body Irradiation. Methods: Three types of dosimeters were considered for this study, LiF Thermoluminescent Dosimeters, Modified Field Effect Transistors(MOSFET ‐Thomson&Nielsen TN‐502RD) and Optically Stimulated Luminescence Dosimeters(OSLD ‐ Landuer's 2% screened nanoDOTs). All three dosimeters were calibrated under full bulildup conditions at 100cm SSD, dmax = 3.4cm for 18MV photon energy and appropriate correction factors were applied for TBI treatment condition. This study is performed on a 30×30×22cm solid water phantom and a rando phantom at the TBI treatment distance. The separations at different locations for phantom were measured and MUs were calculated to deliver 100cGy at the midplane. Dosimeters were placed on the entrance side of the phantoms to measure dmax dose. Each type of dosimeters were irradiated at five locations in the rando phantom under the same treatment setup. The reproducibility of the dosimeters was verified by solidwater phantom measurements. Ten TBI cases, which were monitored using each dosimeter type were selected and tabulated the percentage difference of measured to expected dose for 5 different patient locations. Results: The reproducibility for TLDs, MOSFETs and OSLDs were 118.3cGy +/− 2.7%(1SD), 118.3cGy +/−2.1%(1SD) and 118.3cGy +/− 1.8%(1SD) resp after 10 consecutive measurements in solidwater phantom (Table 1). From rando phantom measurements, maximum percentage variation of the measured to expected dose with 1SD values are TLDs (1.4 +/− 1.4), MOSFETs (3.9+/− 2.2) and OSLDs (1.6 +/− 1.8) (Table 2). Percentage difference of the measured dose to expected dose for 10 clinical cases were TLDs (2.3+/− 2.9), MOSFETs (3.7+/− 4.9) and OSLDs (1.8+/− 2.9%) (Table 3). Conclusions: Measured values were within +/−5% tolerance level for all dosimeters. OSLDs can give more accurate and reproducible results with an added advantage of ease of use and shorter readout period.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3537
Number of pages1
JournalMedical Physics
Volume38
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - 2011

Fingerprint

Whole-Body Irradiation
Radiation Dosimeters
Silver Sulfadiazine
Luminescence
Photons
Reproducibility of Results
Therapeutics
Water

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biophysics
  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging

Cite this

SU‐E‐T‐222 : Performance Comparison of In‐Vivo Dosimeters, including TLDs, MOSFETs, and OSLDs for Patients Receiving Total Body Irradiation. / Pillai, S.; Laub, Wolfram; he, T.

In: Medical Physics, Vol. 38, No. 6, 2011, p. 3537.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{74e175419f3444e68d6880afc1678c2b,
title = "SU‐E‐T‐222: Performance Comparison of In‐Vivo Dosimeters, including TLDs, MOSFETs, and OSLDs for Patients Receiving Total Body Irradiation",
abstract = "Purpose: To compare accuracy of in vivo dosimeters such as TLDs, MOSFETs & OSLDs for patients receiving Total Body Irradiation. Methods: Three types of dosimeters were considered for this study, LiF Thermoluminescent Dosimeters, Modified Field Effect Transistors(MOSFET ‐Thomson&Nielsen TN‐502RD) and Optically Stimulated Luminescence Dosimeters(OSLD ‐ Landuer's 2{\%} screened nanoDOTs). All three dosimeters were calibrated under full bulildup conditions at 100cm SSD, dmax = 3.4cm for 18MV photon energy and appropriate correction factors were applied for TBI treatment condition. This study is performed on a 30×30×22cm solid water phantom and a rando phantom at the TBI treatment distance. The separations at different locations for phantom were measured and MUs were calculated to deliver 100cGy at the midplane. Dosimeters were placed on the entrance side of the phantoms to measure dmax dose. Each type of dosimeters were irradiated at five locations in the rando phantom under the same treatment setup. The reproducibility of the dosimeters was verified by solidwater phantom measurements. Ten TBI cases, which were monitored using each dosimeter type were selected and tabulated the percentage difference of measured to expected dose for 5 different patient locations. Results: The reproducibility for TLDs, MOSFETs and OSLDs were 118.3cGy +/− 2.7{\%}(1SD), 118.3cGy +/−2.1{\%}(1SD) and 118.3cGy +/− 1.8{\%}(1SD) resp after 10 consecutive measurements in solidwater phantom (Table 1). From rando phantom measurements, maximum percentage variation of the measured to expected dose with 1SD values are TLDs (1.4 +/− 1.4), MOSFETs (3.9+/− 2.2) and OSLDs (1.6 +/− 1.8) (Table 2). Percentage difference of the measured dose to expected dose for 10 clinical cases were TLDs (2.3+/− 2.9), MOSFETs (3.7+/− 4.9) and OSLDs (1.8+/− 2.9{\%}) (Table 3). Conclusions: Measured values were within +/−5{\%} tolerance level for all dosimeters. OSLDs can give more accurate and reproducible results with an added advantage of ease of use and shorter readout period.",
author = "S. Pillai and Wolfram Laub and T. he",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1118/1.3612172",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "38",
pages = "3537",
journal = "Medical Physics",
issn = "0094-2405",
publisher = "AAPM - American Association of Physicists in Medicine",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - SU‐E‐T‐222

T2 - Performance Comparison of In‐Vivo Dosimeters, including TLDs, MOSFETs, and OSLDs for Patients Receiving Total Body Irradiation

AU - Pillai, S.

AU - Laub, Wolfram

AU - he, T.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Purpose: To compare accuracy of in vivo dosimeters such as TLDs, MOSFETs & OSLDs for patients receiving Total Body Irradiation. Methods: Three types of dosimeters were considered for this study, LiF Thermoluminescent Dosimeters, Modified Field Effect Transistors(MOSFET ‐Thomson&Nielsen TN‐502RD) and Optically Stimulated Luminescence Dosimeters(OSLD ‐ Landuer's 2% screened nanoDOTs). All three dosimeters were calibrated under full bulildup conditions at 100cm SSD, dmax = 3.4cm for 18MV photon energy and appropriate correction factors were applied for TBI treatment condition. This study is performed on a 30×30×22cm solid water phantom and a rando phantom at the TBI treatment distance. The separations at different locations for phantom were measured and MUs were calculated to deliver 100cGy at the midplane. Dosimeters were placed on the entrance side of the phantoms to measure dmax dose. Each type of dosimeters were irradiated at five locations in the rando phantom under the same treatment setup. The reproducibility of the dosimeters was verified by solidwater phantom measurements. Ten TBI cases, which were monitored using each dosimeter type were selected and tabulated the percentage difference of measured to expected dose for 5 different patient locations. Results: The reproducibility for TLDs, MOSFETs and OSLDs were 118.3cGy +/− 2.7%(1SD), 118.3cGy +/−2.1%(1SD) and 118.3cGy +/− 1.8%(1SD) resp after 10 consecutive measurements in solidwater phantom (Table 1). From rando phantom measurements, maximum percentage variation of the measured to expected dose with 1SD values are TLDs (1.4 +/− 1.4), MOSFETs (3.9+/− 2.2) and OSLDs (1.6 +/− 1.8) (Table 2). Percentage difference of the measured dose to expected dose for 10 clinical cases were TLDs (2.3+/− 2.9), MOSFETs (3.7+/− 4.9) and OSLDs (1.8+/− 2.9%) (Table 3). Conclusions: Measured values were within +/−5% tolerance level for all dosimeters. OSLDs can give more accurate and reproducible results with an added advantage of ease of use and shorter readout period.

AB - Purpose: To compare accuracy of in vivo dosimeters such as TLDs, MOSFETs & OSLDs for patients receiving Total Body Irradiation. Methods: Three types of dosimeters were considered for this study, LiF Thermoluminescent Dosimeters, Modified Field Effect Transistors(MOSFET ‐Thomson&Nielsen TN‐502RD) and Optically Stimulated Luminescence Dosimeters(OSLD ‐ Landuer's 2% screened nanoDOTs). All three dosimeters were calibrated under full bulildup conditions at 100cm SSD, dmax = 3.4cm for 18MV photon energy and appropriate correction factors were applied for TBI treatment condition. This study is performed on a 30×30×22cm solid water phantom and a rando phantom at the TBI treatment distance. The separations at different locations for phantom were measured and MUs were calculated to deliver 100cGy at the midplane. Dosimeters were placed on the entrance side of the phantoms to measure dmax dose. Each type of dosimeters were irradiated at five locations in the rando phantom under the same treatment setup. The reproducibility of the dosimeters was verified by solidwater phantom measurements. Ten TBI cases, which were monitored using each dosimeter type were selected and tabulated the percentage difference of measured to expected dose for 5 different patient locations. Results: The reproducibility for TLDs, MOSFETs and OSLDs were 118.3cGy +/− 2.7%(1SD), 118.3cGy +/−2.1%(1SD) and 118.3cGy +/− 1.8%(1SD) resp after 10 consecutive measurements in solidwater phantom (Table 1). From rando phantom measurements, maximum percentage variation of the measured to expected dose with 1SD values are TLDs (1.4 +/− 1.4), MOSFETs (3.9+/− 2.2) and OSLDs (1.6 +/− 1.8) (Table 2). Percentage difference of the measured dose to expected dose for 10 clinical cases were TLDs (2.3+/− 2.9), MOSFETs (3.7+/− 4.9) and OSLDs (1.8+/− 2.9%) (Table 3). Conclusions: Measured values were within +/−5% tolerance level for all dosimeters. OSLDs can give more accurate and reproducible results with an added advantage of ease of use and shorter readout period.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85024777716&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85024777716&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1118/1.3612172

DO - 10.1118/1.3612172

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85024777716

VL - 38

SP - 3537

JO - Medical Physics

JF - Medical Physics

SN - 0094-2405

IS - 6

ER -