Shirzad, Farzaneh, Bakhshandeh, Mohsen, salehi Barough, Mehdi, Jabbary, Ali, Malekzadeh, Mona. (1397). Comparison between two different methods used for IMRT plans QA of Prostate cancer. , 15(Special Issue-12th. Iranian Congress of Medical Physics), 373-373. doi: 10.22038/ijmp.2018.13037
Farzaneh Shirzad; Mohsen Bakhshandeh; Mehdi salehi Barough; Ali Jabbary; Mona Malekzadeh. "Comparison between two different methods used for IMRT plans QA of Prostate cancer". , 15, Special Issue-12th. Iranian Congress of Medical Physics, 1397, 373-373. doi: 10.22038/ijmp.2018.13037
Shirzad, Farzaneh, Bakhshandeh, Mohsen, salehi Barough, Mehdi, Jabbary, Ali, Malekzadeh, Mona. (1397). 'Comparison between two different methods used for IMRT plans QA of Prostate cancer', , 15(Special Issue-12th. Iranian Congress of Medical Physics), pp. 373-373. doi: 10.22038/ijmp.2018.13037
Shirzad, Farzaneh, Bakhshandeh, Mohsen, salehi Barough, Mehdi, Jabbary, Ali, Malekzadeh, Mona. Comparison between two different methods used for IMRT plans QA of Prostate cancer. , 1397; 15(Special Issue-12th. Iranian Congress of Medical Physics): 373-373. doi: 10.22038/ijmp.2018.13037

Comparison between two different methods used for IMRT plans QA of Prostate cancer

Iranian Journal of Medical Physics
مقاله 366، دوره 15، Special Issue-12th. Iranian Congress of Medical Physics، بهمن و اسفند 2018، صفحه 373-373
نوع مقاله: Conference Proceedings
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22038/ijmp.2018.13037
نویسندگان
Farzaneh Shirzad1؛ Mohsen Bakhshandeh* 2؛ Mehdi salehi Barough3؛ Ali Jabbary4؛ Mona Malekzadeh5
1Department of Nuclear Engineering Central Tehran Branch of Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
2Department of Radiology, Faculty of Allied Medical Science, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3Department of Nuclear Engineering Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
4Department of Medical Physics, Shohada –e- Tajrish Hospital, Tehran, Iran.
5Department of Radiotherapy & Oncology, Shohada- e- Tajrish Hospital, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده
Introduction: The aim of this study is evaluation of two Quality Assurance methods in sliding window IMRT technique and Determination of gamma index in both methods
 
Materials and Methods: In this study two tools named" Delta4" phantom and " Epiqa" software has been used to perform QA on the treatment plan before the actual treatment by Varian linear accelerator Clinac 600C. For this purpose, 20 patient’s treatment plan were assessed with the 3% and 3mm criteria.
 
Results: Each treatment field demonstrated that the gamma index in the delta4 phantom was more than the Epiqa software for all patients. The most uncertainty for a treatment plan in delta4 phantom was 0.88% and for Epiqa software was 1.53%. (p- value <0.05)
Conclusion: In spite of these variations in results and also studying similar researches, these tools can be used as a reliable QA method in radiotherapy centers. Delta4 phantom is preferred to Epiqa software because it is a dosimeter. However, Epiqa software is economical to install. therefore can be used for those centers which cannot afford delta4 phantom due to economic consideration.
کلیدواژه‌ها
IMRT؛ Quality Assurance؛ Delta4؛ Epiqa
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 596
دانشگاه علوم پزشکی مشهد
آمار
تعداد نشریات29
تعداد شماره‌ها2,324
تعداد مقالات24,864
تعداد مشاهده مقاله82,812,701
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله45,865,543
اخبار نشریات