首页> 外文期刊>Medical dosimetry: official journal of the American Association of Medical Dosimetrists >Consistency of vendor-specified activity values for 192Ir brachytherapy sources
【24h】

Consistency of vendor-specified activity values for 192Ir brachytherapy sources

机译:供应商指定的192Ir近距离放射治疗源活动值的一致性

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

A long-term comparison was done between the manufacturer-stated 192Ir activity and the measured 192Ir activities determined with a well-type ionization chamber. Sources for a Nucletron Micro Selectron high-dose-rate (HDR) unit were used for this purpose. The radioactive sources reference activities were determined using a PTW well-type ionization chamber traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology Primary Calibration Laboratory. The measurements were taken in a period of 56 months with 17 different radioactive sources. The manufacturer stated activities were taken from the source calibration certificate provided by the manufacturer. These values were compared with the measured activities. The results have shown that both the percentage deviation of the monthly control measurements with the well-type chamber and the ratio between the measured activities to the manufacturer-stated value lie within ± 2.5%. These results were compared with similar published data and with uncertainty level (3% of the mean and 5% maximum deviation from mean) for brachytherapy sources calibration recommended by the AAPM. It was concluded that a threshold level of ±2.5% can be used as a suitable quality assurance indicator to spot problems in our department. The typical ±5% uncertainty as provided by the manufacturers may be tightened to ±3% to be more in line with published AAPM reports.
机译:在制造商规定的192Ir活性与使用井型电离室测定的192Ir活性之间进行了长期比较。为此,使用了Nucletron Micro Selectron高剂量率(HDR)单元的光源。放射源的参考活动是使用可追溯到美国国家标准技术研究院主要校准实验室的PTW井型电离室确定的。在56个月的时间内使用17种不同的放射源进行了测量。制造商声明的活动来自制造商提供的源校准证书。将这些值与测得的活性进行比较。结果表明,使用井型腔室进行的每月控制测量的百分比偏差以及测得的活动度与制造商规定的值之间的比率均在±2.5%之内。将这些结果与相似的公开数据进行比较,并与AAPM建议的近距离放射治疗源校准的不确定性水平(均值的3%和均值的最大偏差5%)进行比较。结论是,可以将±2.5%的阈值水平用作发现我们部门问题的合适质量保证指标。制造商提供的典型±5%不确定度可能会收紧至±3%,以更符合已发布的APM报告。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号