Clinical impact of dosimetric changes for volumetric modulated arc therapy in log file-based patient dose calculations

PurposeA log file-based method cannot detect dosimetric changes due to linac component miscalibration because log files are insensitive to miscalibration. Herein, clinical impacts of dosimetric changes on a log file-based method were determined.Methods and materialsFive head-and-neck and five prostate plans were applied. Miscalibration-simulated log files were generated by inducing a linac component miscalibration into the log file. Miscalibration magnitudes for leaf, gantry, and collimator at the general tolerance level were ±0.5 mm, ±1°, and ±1°, respectively, and at a tighter tolerance level achievable on current linac were ±0.3 mm, ±0.5°, and ±0.5°, respectively. Re-calculations were performed on patient anatomy using log file data.ResultsChanges in tumor control probability/normal tissue complication probability from treatment planning system dose to re-calculated dose at the general tolerance level was 1.8% on planning target volume (PTV) and 2.4% on organs at risk (OARs) in both plans. These changes at the tighter tolerance level were improved to 1.0% on PTV and to 1.5% on OARs, with a statistically significant difference.ConclusionsWe determined the clinical impacts of dosimetric changes on a log file-based method using a general tolerance level and a tighter tolerance level for linac miscalibration and found that a tighter tolerance level significantly improved the accuracy of the log file-based method.     

A study on conventional IMRT and RapidArc treatment planning techniques for head and neck cancers

AimTo evaluate the performance of volumetric arc modulation with RapidArc against conventional IMRT for head and neck cancers.BackgroundRapidArc is a novel technique that has recently been made available for clinical use. Planning study was done for volumetric arc modulation with RapidArc against conventional IMRT for head and neck cancers.Materials and methodsTen patients with advanced tumors of the nasopharynx, oropharynx, and hypopharynx were selected for the planning comparison study. PTV was delineated for two different dose levels and planning was done by means of simultaneously integrated boost technique. A total dose of 70 Gy was delivered to the boost volume (PTV boost) and 57.7 Gy to the elective PTV (PTV elective) in 35 equal treatment fractions. PTV boost consisted of the gross tumor volume and lymph nodes containing visible macroscopic tumor or biopsy-proven positive lymph nodes, whereas the PTV elective consisted of elective nodal regions. Planning was done for IMRT using 9 fields and RapidArc with single arc, double arc. Beam was equally placed for IMRT plans. Single arc RapidArc plan utilizes full 360° gantry rotation and double arc consists of 2 co-planar arcs of 360° in clockwise and counter clockwise direction. Collimator was rotated from 35 to 45° to cover the entire tumor, which reduced the tongue and groove effect during gantry rotation. All plans were generated with 6 MV X-rays for CLINAC 2100 Linear Accelerator. Calculations were done in the Eclipse treatment planning system (version 8.6) using the AAA algorithm.ResultsDouble arc plans show superior dose homogeneity in PTV compared to a single arc and IMRT 9 field technique. Target coverage was almost similar in all the techniques. The sparing of spinal cord in terms of the maximum dose was better in the double arc technique by 4.5% when compared to the IMRT 9 field and single arc techniques. For healthy tissue, no significant changes were observed between the plans in terms of the mean dose and integral dose. But RapidArc plans showed a reduction in the volume of the healthy tissue irradiated at V_15 Gy (5.81% for single arc and 4.69% for double arc) and V_20 Gy (7.55% for single arc and 5.89% for double arc) dose levels when compared to the 9-Field IMRT technique. For brain stem, maximum dose was similar in all the techniques. The average MU (±SD) needed to deliver the dose of 200 cGy per fraction was 474 ± 80 MU and 447 ± 45 MU for double arc and single arc as against 948 ± 162 MU for the 9-Field IMRT plan. A considerable reduction in maximum dose to the mandible by 6.05% was observed with double arc plan. Double arc shows a reduction in the parotid mean dose when compared with single arc and IMRT plans.ConclusionRapidArc using double arc provided a significant sparing of OARs and healthy tissue without compromising target coverage compared to IMRT. The main disadvantage with IMRT observed was higher monitor units and longer treatment time.     

Sparing dysphagia/aspiration related structures using novel hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy

PurposeStudies using split field IMRT to spare dysphagia/aspiration related structures (DARS) have raised concern regarding dose uncertainty at matchline. This study explores the utility of hybrid VMAT in sparing the DARS and assesses matchline dose uncertainty in postoperative oral cavity cancer patients and compares it with VMAT.Methods & materialsTen postoperative oral cavity cancer patients were planned with h-VMAT and VMAT using the same planning CT dataset. PTV and DARS were contoured using standard delineation guidelines. In h-VMAT 80% of the neck dose was planned using AP/PA technique and then VMAT optimization was done for the total PTV by keeping the corresponding AP/PA plan as the base dose. Planning goal for PTV was V_95% ≥ 95% and for DARS, adequate sparing. Plans and dose volume histograms were analyzed using dosimetric indices. Absolute point and portal dose measurements were done for h-VMAT plans to verify dose at the matchline.ResultsCoverage in both the techniques was comparable. Significant differences were observed in mean doses to DARS (Larynx: 24.36 ± 2.51 versus 16.88 ± 2.41 Gy; p < 0.0006, Pharyngeal constrictors: 25.16 ± 2.41 versus 21.2 ± 2.1 Gy; p < 0.005, Esophageal inlet: 18.71 ± 2 versus 12.06 ± 0.79 Gy; p < 0.0002) favoring h-VMAT. Total MU in both the techniques was comparable. Average percentage variations in point dose measurements in h-VMAT done at +3.5 and −3.5 positions were (1.47 ± 1.48 and 2.28 ± 1.35%) respectively. Average gamma agreement for portal dose measured was 97.07%.Conclusionh-VMAT achieves better sparing of DARS with no matchline dose uncertainty. Since these patients have swallowing dysfunction post-operatively, attempts should be made to spare these critical structures as much as possible.     

On the parameter describing the generalised equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) for tumours

The purpose of the present work was to estimate the parameter ‘a’ describing the generalised equivalent uniform dose (gEUD) for tumours and its dependence on radiobiological parameters. The consequences of uncertainties in a on the gEUD were also studied. An estimate of a was found by requiring that, for a given target dose distribution, the mechanistic EUD (based on radiobiological linear quadratic modelling) equals gEUD. The estimate of a was found to depend on the dose distribution, and decreased with factors that increase the slope of the cell survival curve (i.e. decreasing α/β values and increasing α values). Furthermore, the parameter a was estimated for 35 prostate cancer IMRT plans of varying dose distributions, for two sets of previously published radiobiological parameters: (1) α = 0.15 Gy⁻¹ and α/β = 3 Gy, and (2) α = 0.26 Gy⁻¹ and α/β = 10 Gy. The estimated values of a ranged from −25.6 to −22.4 for all combinations of dose distributions and parameter sets. Uncertainties in a were found to give only small uncertainties in gEUD. Although the current work shows limitations of the gEUD model for tumours, gEUD may still be preferable for biological treatment plan optimization, evaluation and reporting.     

NTCP modeling analysis of acute hematologic toxicity in whole pelvic radiation therapy for gynecologic malignancies – A dosimetric comparison of IMRT and spot-scanning proton therapy (SSPT)

PurposeThis treatment planning study was conducted to determine whether spot scanning proton beam therapy (SSPT) reduces the risk of grade ⩾3 hematologic toxicity (HT3+) compared with intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) for postoperative whole pelvic radiation therapy (WPRT).Methods and materialsThe normal tissue complication probability (NTCP) of the risk of HT3+ was used as an in silico surrogate marker in this analysis. IMRT and SSPT plans were created for 13 gynecologic malignancy patients who had received hysterectomies. The IMRT plans were generated using the 7-fields step and shoot technique. The SSPT plans were generated using anterior-posterior field with single field optimization. Using the relative biological effectives (RBE) value of 1.0 for IMRT and 1.1 for SSPT, the prescribed dose was 45 Gy(RBE) in 1.8 Gy(RBE) per fractions for 95% of the planning target volume (PTV). The homogeneity index (HI) and the conformity index (CI) of the PTV were also compared.ResultsThe bone marrow (BM) and femoral head doses using SSPT were significantly lower than with IMRT. The NTCP modeling analysis showed that the risk of HT3+ using SSPT was significantly lower than with IMRT (NTCP = 0.04 ± 0.01 and 0.19 ± 0.03, p = 0.0002, respectively). There were no significant differences in the CI and HI of the PTV between IMRT and SSPT (CI = 0.97 ± 0.01 and 0.96 ± 0.02, p = 0.3177, and HI = 1.24 ± 0.11 and 1.27 ± 0.05, p = 0.8473, respectively).ConclusionThe SSPT achieves significant reductions in the dose to BM without compromising target coverage, compared with IMRT. The NTCP value for HT3+ in SSPT was significantly lower than in IMRT.     

A dosimetric evaluation of IGART strategies for cervix cancer treatment

PurposeImage guided adaptive radiotherapy (IGART) strategies can be used to include the temporal aspects of radiotherapy treatment. A dosimetric evaluation of on- and off-line adaptive strategies are done in this study.MethodsA library of equivalent uniform dose (EUD)-based Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy Treatment plans with incrementally increasing clinical target volume (CTV)-to-planning target volume (PTV) margins were developed for 10 patients. Utilizing daily computed tomography (CT) images an on-line strategy using a margin-of-the-day (MOD) concept that selects the best plan from the library was employed. This was compared to an off-line strategy with full analysis of accumulated dose between fractions where dosimetric deviations from the treatment intent triggered plan adaptation. A fixed margin treatment approach was used as benchmark.ResultsUsing fixed margins of <15 mm lead to under-dosages of more than 5 Gy in total delivered dose. The average CTV EUD for the off-line and on-line strategy was 50.0 ± 5.0 Gy and 50.4 ± 2.0 Gy respectively and OAR doses were comparable.ConclusionA fixed margin treatment approach yields a significant probability of CTV under-dosage. Using EUD dose metrics CTV coverage can be restored in both the off-line and on-line adaptive strategies at acceptable OAR dose levels. Considering the workload and time on the treatment machine, the off-line strategy proves to be sufficient and more practical.     

Effect of patient positioning on carbon-ion therapy planned dose distribution to pancreatic tumors and organs at risk

PurposePancreatic tumor treatment dose distribution variations associated with supine and prone patient positioning were evaluated.MethodsA total of 33 patients with pancreatic tumors who underwent CT in the supine and prone positions were analyzed retrospectively. Gross tumor volume (GTV), planning target volume (PTV), and organs at risk (OARs) (duodenum and stomach) were contoured. The prescribed dose of 55.2 Gy (RBE) was planned from four beam angles (0°, 90°, 180°, and 270°). Patient collimator and compensating boli were designed for each field. Dose distributions were calculated for each field in the supine and prone positions. To improve dose distribution, patient positioning was selected from supine or prone for each beam field.ResultsCompared with conventional beam angle and patient positioning, D2cc of 1st-2nd portion of duodenum (D1-D2), 3rd-4th portion of duodenum (D3-D4), and stomach could be reduced to a maximum of 6.4 Gy (RBE), 3.5 Gy (RBE), and 4.5 Gy (RBE) by selection of patient positioning. V10 of D1-D2, D3-D4, and stomach could be reduced to a maximum of 7.2 cc, 11.3 cc, and 11.5 cc, respectively. D95 of GTV and PTV were improved to a maximum of 6.9% and 3.7% of the prescribed dose, respectively.ConclusionsOptimization of patient positioning for each beam angle in treatment planning has the potential to reduce OARs dose maintaining tumor dose in pancreatic treatment.     

Gated carbon-ion scanning treatment for pancreatic tumour with field specific target volume and organs at risk

ObjectiveTo assess the feasibility of treatment planning for pancreatic tumours subject to respiratory motion using field-specific target volumes (FTV) and field-specific organs at risk (FOAR) using four-dimensional computed tomography (4DCT).MethodsFourteen pancreatic cancer patients underwent 4DCT. Radiation oncologists contoured the gross tumour volume (GTV), clinical target volume (CTV), spinal cord, duodenum, kidneys, and stomach. The gating duty cycle was set to 30 % around exhalation. FTV and FOAR were calculated using the 4DCT dataset. Planning target volumes (PTV) and planning organs at risk volumes (PRV) were defined as equal to FTV and FOAR, respectively. A dose of 55.2 Gy relative biological effectiveness (RBE) was planned to target the PTV from four beam angles. A single field uniform dose (SFUD) plan was selected. The dose distribution, including intrafractional motion changes, was generated.ResultsThe mean volume of target receiving 95 % of the planned doses was 96.4 ± 4.1 % to the GTV and 94.7 ± 0.9 % to the CTV. The highest dose to 2 cc of duodenal volume was 27.5 Gy (RBE). The volume of the stomach receiving ⩾30 Gy (RBE) was <7.0 cc in all patients. All metrics for OARs satisfied dose constraints.ConclusionDose to the CTV was covered sufficiently by the 4DCT-generated FTV, and dose to OARs was reduced by 4DCT-generated FOAR. This methodology may prevent adverse reactions while preserving local tumour control.     

Dosimetric comparison of RapidPlan and manually optimized plans in volumetric modulated arc therapy for prostate cancer

PurposeThis study evaluated whether RapidPlan based plans (RP plans) created by a single optimization, are usable in volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) for patients with prostate cancer.MethodsWe used 51 previously administered VMAT plans to train a RP model. Thirty RP plans were created by a single optimization without planner intervention during optimization. Differences between RP plans and clinical manual optimization (CMO) plans created by an experienced planner for the same patients were analyzed (Wilcoxon tests) in terms of homogeneity index (HI), conformation number (CN), D_95%, and D_2% to planning target volume (PTV), mean dose, V_50Gy, V_70Gy, V_75Gy, and V_78Gy to rectum and bladder, monitor unit (MU), and multi-leaf collimator (MLC) sequence complexity.ResultsRP and CMO values for PTV D_95%, PTV D_2%, HI, and CN were significantly similar (p < 0.05 for all). RP mean dose, V_50Gy, and V_70Gy to rectum were superior or comparable to CMO values; RP V_75Gy and V_78Gy were higher than in CMO plans (p < 0.05). RP bladder dose-volume parameter values (except V_78Gy) were lower than in CMO plans (p < 0.05). MU values were RP: 730 ± 55 MU and CMO: 580 ± 37 MU (p < 0.05); and MLC sequence complexity scores were RP: 0.25 ± 0.02 and CMO: 0.35 ± 0.03 (p < 0.05).ConclusionsRP plans created by a single optimization were clinically acceptable in VMAT for patient with prostate cancer. Our simple model could reduce optimization time, independently of planner’s skill and knowledge.     

Use of a second-dose calculation algorithm to check dosimetric parameters for the dose distribution of a first-dose calculation algorithm for lung SBRT plans

PurposeTo verify lung stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) plans using a secondary treatment planning system (TPS) as an independent method of verification and to define tolerance levels (TLs) in lung SBRT between the primary and secondary TPSs.MethodsA total of 147 lung SBRT plans calculated using X-ray voxel Monte Carlo (XVMC) were exported from iPlan to Eclipse in DICOM format. Dose distributions were recalculated using the Acuros XB (AXB) and the anisotropic analytical algorithm (AAA), while maintaining monitor units (MUs) and the beam arrangement. Dose to isocenter and dose-volumetric parameters, such as D₂, D₅₀, D₉₅ and D₉₈, were evaluated for each patient. The TLs of all parameters between XVMC and AXB (TL_AXB) and between XVMC and AAA (TL_AAA) were calculated as the mean ± 1.96 standard deviations.ResultsAXB values agreed with XVMC values within 3.5% for all dosimetric parameters in all patients. By contrast, AAA sometimes calculated a 10% higher dose in PTV D₉₅ and D₉₈ than XVMC. The TL_AXB and TL_AAA of the dose to isocenter were −0.3 ± 1.4% and 0.6 ± 2.9%, respectively. Those of D₉₅ were 1.3 ± 1.8% and 1.7 ± 3.6%, respectively.ConclusionsThis study quantitatively demonstrated that the dosimetric performance of AXB is almost equal to that of XVMC, compared with that of AAA. Therefore, AXB is a more appropriate algorithm for an independent verification method for XVMC.     

Utilization of cone-beam CT for offline evaluation of target volume coverage during prostate image-guided radiotherapy based on bony anatomy alignment

AimTo assess target volume coverage during prostate image-guided radiotherapy based on bony anatomy alignment and to assess possibility of safety margin reduction.BackgroundImplementation of IGRT should influence safety margins. Utilization of cone-beam CT provides current 3D anatomic information directly in irradiation position. Such information enables reconstruction of the actual dose distribution.Materials and methodsSeventeen prostate patients were treated with daily bony anatomy image-guidance. Cone-beam CT (CBCT) scans were acquired once a week immediately after bony anatomy alignment. After the prostate, seminal vesicles, rectum and bladder were contoured, the delivered dose distribution was reconstructed. Target dose coverage was evaluated by the proportion of the CTV encompassed by the 95% isodose. Original plans employed a 1 cm safety margin. Alternative plans assuming a smaller 7 mm margin between CTV and PTV were evaluated in the same way. Rectal and bladder volumes were compared with the initial ones. Rectal and bladder volumes irradiated with doses higher than 75 Gy, 70 Gy, 60 Gy, 50 Gy and 40 Gy were analyzed.ResultsIn 12% of reconstructed plans the prostate coverage was not sufficient. The prostate underdosage was observed in 5 patients. Coverage of seminal vesicles was not satisfactory in 3% of plans. Most of the target underdosage corresponded to excessive rectal or bladder filling. Evaluation of alternative plans assuming a smaller 7 mm margin revealed 22% and 11% of plans where prostate and seminal vesicles coverage, respectively, was compromised. These were distributed over 8 and 7 patients, respectively.ConclusionSufficient dose coverage of target volumes was not achieved for all patients. Reducing of safety margin is not acceptable. Initial rectal and bladder volumes cannot be considered representative for subsequent treatment.     

Hippocampal dose during Linac-based stereotactic radiotherapy for brain metastases: An observational study

IntroductionAim of the present study is to evaluate homolateral and contralateral hippocampus (H-H, C-H, respectively) dose during Fractionated Stereotactic Radiotherapy (FSRT) or Radiosurgery (SRS) for brain metastases (BM).Materials & methodsPatients with BM < 5, size ≤ 30 mm, KPS ≥ 80 and a life expectancy > 3 months, were considered for SRS/FSRT (total dose 15–30 Gy, 1–5 fractions). For each BM, a Flattening Filter Free (FFF) Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT) plan was generated with one or two arcs. Hippocampi were not considered during optimizations phase and were contoured and evaluated retrospectively in terms of dose: the Dmedian, Dmean, D0.1cc and the V1Gy, V2Gy, V5Gy and V10Gy were analyzed.ResultsFrom April 2014 to December 2015, 81 BM were treated with FFF-FSRT/SRS. For the H-H, the average values of Dmedian, Dmean and D0.1cc were 1.5Gy, 1.54Gy and 2.2Gy, respectively, while the V1Gy, V2Gy, V5Gy and V10Gy values were 25%, 8.9%, 8.9% and 2.1%, respectively. For the C–H, the average Dmedian, Dmean and D0.1 cc were 0.7Gy, 0.7Gy, 0.9Gy, respectively, while the average values of V1Gy, V2Gy, V5Gy and V10Gy were 18%, 10.2%, 2.8% and 1.4%, respectively. Tumor dimension, tumor cranial-caudal length and the distance between BM and H-H were correlated to Dmedian, Dmean and D0.1cc. For C-H, only the distance from PTV was correlated with a dose reduction.ConclusionDuring FFF-FSRT/SRS, hippocampus received a negligible dose. Despite its clinical significance is still under evaluation, in patients with a long life expectancy, H-H should be considered during Linac-based FSRT/SRS.     

Is the lack of respiratory gating prejudicial for left breast TomoDirect treatments?

Background and purposeTomoDirect (TD) can only operate in free-breathing. The purpose of this study is to compare TD with breath-hold 3D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques for left breast treatments, and to determine if the lack of respiratory gating is a handicap for cardiac sparing.Materials and methods15 patients treated for left breast had two computed tomography simulation, in free breathing (FB) and in deep-inspiration breath-hold (DIBH). Four treatments were planned: TD-FB, 3DCRT-FB, 3DCRT-DIBH and IMRT-DIBH. Dose to PTV, heart, lungs, right breast and patient were compared.ResultsA slightly lower cardiac mean dose is found for 3DCRT-DIBH than for TD-FB group (1.99 Gy Vs 2.89 Gy, p = 0.0462), while no statistical difference is found for heart V₂₀. TD-FB plans show the best PTV dose homogeneity (0.053, p < 0.001) and the lowest left lung mean dose (5.16 Gy, p < 0.001). No major differences are found for the other organs.ConclusionsTomoDirect and breath-hold 3DCRT are complementary techniques for left breast treatments: for a minority of patients, respiratory gating is mandatory to lower cardiac dose; for the remaining majority of patients, TomoDirect achieves better PTV homogeneity and reduced left lung dose, with cardiac dose equivalent to 3DCRT-DIBH.     

Influence of different Fletcher–Suit applicator geometries on sagittal dose distribution

IntroductionOne of the brachytherapy treatment modality of cervix carcinomas is insertion with Fletcher–Suit (FS) applicator. Depending on the patient anatomy and pathology and on the construction of the FS applicator different geometrical arrangements in ovoid separation, in ovoids' sagittal level with respect to the tandem were experienced. The multiple insertions show minor differences in applicator geometries. The aim of the study is to evaluate the influence of main geometrical parameters: the ovoid separation, symmetry and the ovoids' sagittal shift on dose distribution in different FS applicator arrangements. We tested the effect of dwell time settings in improvement of dose distribution of less adequate insertions. We also investigated the effect of inter-fractional variation of applicator geometry.Materials and methodsWe considered 73 treatment fractions of 22 patients. All insertions were performed by the same gynaecologist with the same type of FS applicator, while the treatment plans were generated by the same physicist using the same treatment planning method. We compared the sagittal dose distribution of different FS applicator geometries with dose levels at two applicator points, defined 2 cm apart from the tandem towards the bladder and rectum. We computed the Pearson correlation coefficients between the dose levels at the applicator points and the ovoid separation, symmetry and the ovoids' sagittal shift. We also investigated the effect of dwell time settings in ovoids in order to decrease the dose to organs at risk. The inter-fractional variation of the FS applicator geometries and the influence on the dose levels at the two applicator points were also tested.Results and conclusionsStrong correlation was found between the ovoid separation and dose values to applicator points defined in sagittal direction of FS applicator arrangements. Also strong correlation was between the ovoids' sagittal position with respect to the tandem and the applicator point defined towards the rectum, while the ovoid symmetry had no influence on the sagittal dose distribution. The standard deviations of inter-fractional variation of the ovoid separation and the ovoids' sagittal position were within ±5.2 mm and ±10.2 mm respectively. The inter-fractional variations in FS applicator geometry resulted in variation in dose levels at the applicator points ±0.8 Gy typically, while the largest value was ±1.6 Gy.     

Variation of the prescription dose using the analytical anisotropic algorithm in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy

PurposeThe aim of the present investigation was to evaluate the dosimetric variation regarding the analytical anisotropic algorithm (AAA) relative to other algorithms in lung stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT). We conducted a multi-institutional study involving six institutions using a secondary check program and compared the AAA to the Acuros XB (AXB) in two institutions.MethodsAll lung SBRT plans (128 patients) were generated using the AAA, pencil beam convolution with the Batho (PBC-B) and adaptive convolve (AC). All institutions used the same secondary check program (simple MU analysis [SMU]) implemented by a Clarkson-based dose calculation algorithm. Measurement was performed in a heterogeneous phantom to compare doses using the three different algorithms and the SMU for the measurements. A retrospective analysis was performed to compute the confidence limit (CL; mean ± 2SD) for the dose deviation between the AAA, PBC, AC and SMU. The variations between the AAA and AXB were evaluated in two institutions, then the CL was acquired.ResultsIn comparing the measurements, the AAA showed the largest systematic dose error (3%). In calculation comparisons, the CLs of the dose deviation were 8.7 ± 9.9% (AAA), 4.2 ± 3.9% (PBC-B) and 5.7 ± 4.9% (AC). The CLs of the dose deviation between the AXB and the AAA were 1.8 ± 1.5% and −0.1 ± 4.4%, respectively, in the two institutions.ConclusionsThe CL of the AAA showed much larger variation than the other algorithms. Relative to the AXB, larger systematic and random deviations still appeared. Thus, care should be taken in the use of AAA for lung SBRT.     

Eye lens dose correlations with personal dose equivalent and patient exposure in paediatric interventional cardiology performed with a fluoroscopic biplane system

PurposeTo analyse the correlations between the eye lens dose estimates performed with dosimeters placed next to the eyes of paediatric interventional cardiologists working with a biplane system, the personal dose equivalent measured on the thorax and the patient dose.MethodsThe eye lens dose was estimated in terms of H_p(0.07) on a monthly basis, placing optically stimulated luminescence dosimeters (OSLDs) on goggles. The H_p(0.07) personal dose equivalent was measured over aprons with whole-body OSLDs. Data on patient dose as recorded by the kerma-area product (P_KA) were collected using an automatic dose management system. The 2 paediatric cardiologists working in the facility were involved in the study, and 222 interventions in a 1-year period were evaluated. The ceiling-suspended screen was often disregarded during interventions.ResultsThe annual eye lens doses estimated on goggles were 4.13 ± 0.93 and 4.98 ± 1.28 mSv. Over the aprons, the doses obtained were 10.83 ± 0.99 and 11.97 ± 1.44 mSv. The correlation between the goggles and the apron dose was R² = 0.89, with a ratio of 0.38. The correlation with the patient dose was R² = 0.40, with a ratio of 1.79 μSv Gy⁻¹ cm⁻². The dose per procedure obtained over the aprons was 102 ± 16 μSv, and on goggles 40 ± 9 μSv. The eye lens dose normalized to P_KA was 2.21 ± 0.58 μSv Gy⁻¹ cm⁻².ConclusionsMeasurements of personal dose equivalent over the paediatric cardiologist’s apron are useful to estimate eye lens dose levels if no radiation protection devices are typically used.