A jaw calibration method to provide a homogeneous dose distribution in the matching region when using a monoisocentric beam split technique.

PURPOSE: Asymmetric collimators are currently available in most of linear accelerators. They involve a lot of clinical improvements, such as the monoisocentric beam split technique that is more and more used in many external radiotherapy treatments. The tolerance established for each independent jaw positioning is 1 mm. Within this tolerance, a gap or overlap of the collimators up to 2 mm can occur in the half beams matching region, causing dose heterogeneities up to 40%. In order to solve this dosimetric problem, we propose an accurate jaw calibration method based on the Monte Carlo modeling of linac photon beams. METHODS: Simulating different jaw misalignments, the dose distribution occurring in the matching region for each particular configuration is precisely known, so we can relate the misalignment of the jaws with the maximum heterogeneity produced. From experimental measurements using film dosimetry, and taking into account Monte Carlo results, we obtain the actual misalignment of each jaw. By direct inspection of the readings of the potentiometers that control the position of the jaws, high precision correction can be performed, adjusting the obtained misalignments. RESULTS: In the linac studied, the dose heterogeneity in the junction performed with X jaws (those farther from the source), and 6 MV photon beam was initially over 12%, although each jaw was within the tolerance in position. After jaw calibration, the heterogeneity was reduced to below 3%. CONCLUSIONS: With this method, we are able to reduce the positioning accuracy to 0.2 mm. Consequently, the dose distribution in the junction of abutted fields is highly smoothed, achieving the maximum dose heterogeneity to be less than 3%.

Analysis of shielding calculation methods for 16- and 64-slice computed tomography facilities.

The new multislice computed tomography (CT) machines require some new methods of shielding calculation, which need to be analysed. NCRP Report No. 147 proposes three shielding calculation methods based on the following dosimetric parameters: weighted CT dose index for the peripheral axis (CTDI(w, per)), dose-length product (DLP) and isodose maps. A survey of these three methods has been carried out. For this analysis, we have used measured values of the dosimetric quantities involved and also those provided by the manufacturer, making a comparison between the results obtained. The barrier thicknesses when setting up two different multislice CT instruments, a Philips Brilliance 16 or a Philips Brilliance 64, in the same room, are also compared. Shielding calculation from isodose maps provides more reliable results than the other two methods, since it is the only method that takes the actual scattered radiation distribution into account. It is concluded therefore that the most suitable method for calculating the barrier thicknesses of the CT facility is the one based on isodose maps. This study also shows that for different multislice CT machines the barrier thicknesses do not necessarily become bigger as the number of slices increases, because of the great dependence on technique used in CT protocols for different anatomical regions.