首页> 外文期刊>Medical Physics >Comparison of high-energy photon and electron dosimetry for various dosimetry protocols.
【24h】

Comparison of high-energy photon and electron dosimetry for various dosimetry protocols.

机译:各种剂量测定方案的高能光子和电子剂量测定的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group 51 (TG-51) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) published a new high-energy photon and electron dosimetry protocol, in 1999 and 2000, respectively. These protocols are based on the use of an ion chamber having an absorbed-dose to water calibration factor with a 60Co beam. These are different from the predecessors, the TG-21 and IAEA TRS-277 protocols, which require a 60Co exposure or air-kerma calibration factor. The purpose of this work is to present the dose comparison between various dosimetry protocols and the AAPM TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy photon and electron beams. The absorbed-dose to water calculated according to the Japanese Association of Radiological Physics (JARP), International Atomic Energy Agency Technical Report Series No. 277 (IAEA TRS-277) and No. 398 (IAEA TRS-398) protocols is compared to that calculated using the TG-51 protocol. For various Farmer-type chambers in photon beams, TG-51 is found to predict 0.6-2.1% higher dose than JARP. Similarly, TG-51 is found to be higher by 0.7-1.7% than TRS-277. For electron beams TG-51 is higher than JARP by 1.5-3.8% and TRS-277 by 0.2-1.9%. The reasons for these differences are presented in terms of the cavity-gas calibration factor, Ngas, and a dose conversion factor, Fw, which converts the absorbed-dose to air in the chamber to the absorbed-dose to water. The ratio of cavity-gas calibration factors based on absorbed-dose to water calibration factors, N60Co(D,w), in TG-51 and cavity-gas calibration factors which are equivalent to absorbed-dose to air chamber factors, N(D,air), based on the IAEA TRS-381 protocol is 1.008 on average. However, the estimated uncertainty of the ratio between the two cavity-gas calibration factors is 0.9% (1 s.d.) and consequently, the observed difference of 0.8% is not significant. The absorbed-dose to water and exposure or air-kerma calibration factors are based on standards traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). In contrast, the absorbed-dose to water determined with TRS-398 is in good agreement with TG-51 within about 0.5% for photon and electron beams.
机译:美国医学物理学会协会任务组51(TG-51)和国际原子能机构(IAEA)分别于1999年和2000年发布了新的高能光子和电子剂量测定规程。这些协议基于使用离子腔室的情况,该离子腔室的吸收剂量与水的校准系数为60Co。这些与之前的TG-21和IAEA TRS-277协议不同,后者需要60Co暴露或空气比释动能校正因子。这项工作的目的是介绍各种剂量学方案与AAPM TG-51方案之间的剂量比较,以用于高能光子和电子束的临床参考剂量学。将根据日本放射物理学协会(JARP),国际原子能机构技术报告丛书第277号(IAEA TRS-277)和第398号(IAEA TRS-398)协议计算出的吸收剂量与该吸收剂量进行比较使用TG-51协议进行计算。对于光子束中的各种Farmer型腔室,发现TG-51的剂量比JARP高0.6-2.1%。同样,发现TG-51比TRS-277高0.7-1.7%。对于电子束,TG-51比JARP高1.5-3.8%,TRS-277高0.2-1.9%。这些差异的原因以腔体气体校准因子Ngas和剂量转换因子Fw表示,该因子将腔室内的吸收剂量转换为空气,再将吸收剂量转换为水。 TG-51中基于吸收剂量的腔体气体校正因子与水校正因子N60Co(D,w)之比和等于吸收剂量与气室因子的腔体气体校正因子N(D ,air),基于IAEA TRS-381协议的平均值为1.008。但是,两个腔体气体校准因子之间的比率的估计不确定性为0.9%(1 s.d.),因此,观察到的0.8%的差异并不显着。对水的吸收剂量和暴露或空气比释动能校正因子基于可追溯到美国国家标准技术研究院(NIST)的标准。相比之下,用TRS-398测定的对水的吸收剂量与TG-51在光子和电子束的约0.5%内吻合良好。

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