[Dose delivered to the patient by megavoltage cone beam computed tomography imaging]. / Dose délivrée au patient lors de l'acquisition d'images par tomographie conique de haute énergie.

PURPOSE: To study the dose delivered by a megavoltage cone beam computed tomography imaging system (MVCBCT) installed on a Oncor Impression linac (Siemens). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The acquisition of MVCBCT images was modelled in a treatment planning system by 67 photon beams (6 MV). A study was conducted to: compare the calculated and measured dose at the centre of a cylindrical phantom; compare the calculated and measured dose distributions in the Alderson-Rando phantom (pelvis); study the influence of MVCBCT image acquisition for the repositioning of a prostate cancer patient treated by 3D conformal radiotherapy (prescribed dose of 74 Gy), on the dose-volume histograms (DVH) for the treatment plus seven MVCBCT (protocol D1-3 and weekly), treatment plus 37 MVCBCT (one for each day of treatment). RESULTS: The difference between calculated and measured doses at the centre of the cylindrical phantom was less than 3%. A deviation of 7% maximum was found between the dose distribution calculated in the Rando phantom and the measured doses normalized at the beam isocentre. The dose delivered at the isocentre was equal to 3,7 cGy for a "5 MU" protocol, with a maximum dose of 6 cGy. In the case of the patient considered, the acquisition of 37 MVCBCT corresponded to an additional mean dose to the PTV of 1.2 Gy for a protocol "5MU" with a significant influence on the DVH. CONCLUSION: In view of this study, it appears that the doses delivered in frequent use of MVCBCT must be taken into account by the radiation oncologist in assessing the therapeutic dose delivered to the target volume and organs at risk.

[Quality control of megavoltage cone beam CT imaging system]. / Contrôle qualité d'un système d'imagerie cone beam mégavoltage.

PURPOSE: This paper presents the development of a protocol for quality control of a megavoltage cone beam CT imaging system (MVCB) mounted on a Siemens Oncor 6MV linear accelerator. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Several parameters were controlled on the MVCB system: (1) the initial geometric calibration of the system; (2) the quality of the images (geometric distortion, uniformity, spatial resolution, low contrast resolution) for various protocols; (3) the correspondence between the intensity of voxels and electronic densities; (4) the dose delivered when achieving a MVCB. These tests were done mainly with two cylindrical phantoms specific to the quality control (QC) of a MVCB system, supplied by Siemens, and with the Catphan 600 phantom (The Phantom Laboratory) and Quasar Multipurpose Body phantom (Modus Medical Devices Inc). RESULTS: The results of the quality control of the images were within the tolerances. The use of the Catphan 600 phantom was inadequate for the QC of MVCB images. These tests also highlighted the need to correct the MVCB images for the "cupping artefact" for dose calculation purpose. CONCLUSION: The initial characteristics of the MVCB imaging system were established. Such testing also provided the assessment of the influence of various parameters on the image quality as well as the associated dose delivered during their acquisition, and emphasized the corrections needed to use MVCB images for dose calculation.