Comparison of inhomogeneity correction algorithms in small photon fields.

Algorithms such as convolution superposition, Batho, and equivalent pathlength which were originally developed and validated for conventional treatments under conditions of electronic equilibrium using relatively large fields greater than 5 x 5 cm2 are routinely employed for inhomogeneity corrections. Modern day treatments using intensity modulated radiation therapy employ small beamlets characterized by the resolution of the multileaf collimator. These beamlets, in general, do not provide electronic equilibrium even in a homogeneous medium, and these effects are exaggerated in media with inhomogenieties. Monte Carlo simulations are becoming a tool of choice in understanding the dosimetry of small photon fields as they encounter low density media. In this study, depth dose data from the Monte Carlo simulations are compared to the results of the convolution superposition, Batho, and equivalent pathlength algorithms. The central axis dose within the low-density inhomogeneity as calculated by Monte Carlo simulation and convolution superposition decreases for small field sizes whereas it increases using the Batho and equivalent pathlength algorithms. The dose perturbation factor (DPF) is defined as the ratio of dose to a point within the inhomogeneity to the same point in a homogeneous phantom. The dose correction factor is defined as the ratio of dose calculated by an algorithm at a point to the Monte Carlo derived dose at the same point, respectively. DPF is noted to be significant for small fields and low density for all algorithms. Comparisons of the algorithms with Monte Carlo simulations is reflected in the DCF, which is close to 1.0 for the convolution-superposition algorithm. The Batho and equivalent pathlength algorithms differ significantly from Monte Carlo simulation for most field sizes and densities. Convolution superposition shows better agreement with Monte Carlo data versus the Batho or equivalent pathlength corrections. As the field size increases the DCF's for all algorithms converge toward 1.0. The largest differences in DCF are at the interface where changes in electron transport are greatest. For a 6 MV photon beam, electronic equilibrium is restored at field sizes above 3 cm diameter and all of the algorithms predict dose in and beyond the inhomogeneous region equally well. For accurate dosimetry of small fields within and near inhomogeneities, however, simple algorithms such as Batho and equivalent pathlength should be avoided.

[1]  A. Ahnesjö Collapsed cone convolution of radiant energy for photon dose calculation in heterogeneous media. , 1989, Medical physics.

[2]  R Mohan,et al.  Energy and angular distributions of photons from medical linear accelerators. , 1985, Medical physics.

[3]  A. Brahme,et al.  Comparative dosimetry in narrow high-energy photon beams. , 2000, Physics in medicine and biology.

[4]  J. Cunningham,et al.  The validity of the density scaling method in primary electron transport for photon and electron beams. , 1990, Medical physics.

[5]  J. Wong,et al.  On methods of inhomogeneity corrections for photon transport. , 1990, Medical physics.

[6]  M R Sontag,et al.  The equivalent tissue-air ratio method for making absorbed dose calculations in a heterogeneous medium. , 1978, Radiology.

[7]  G K Svensson,et al.  Measurements of dose distributions in small beams of 6 MV x-rays. , 1987, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  X. Li,et al.  Reducing loss in lateral charged-particle equilibrium due to air cavities present in x-ray irradiated media by using longitudinal magnetic fields. , 2001, Medical physics.

[9]  H Palmans,et al.  Underdosage of the upper-airway mucosa for small fields as used in intensity-modulated radiation therapy: a comparison between radiochromic film measurements, Monte Carlo simulations, and collapsed cone convolution calculations. , 2002, Medical physics.

[10]  I. Das,et al.  A Monte Carlo study of IMRT beamlets in inhomogeneous media. , 2003, Medical physics.

[11]  R. Mohan,et al.  The impact of electron transport on the accuracy of computed dose. , 2000, Medical physics.

[12]  E. Yorke,et al.  Monte Carlo evaluation of tissue inhomogeneity effects in the treatment of the head and neck. , 2001, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[13]  Tatsuya Fujisaki,et al.  Dose distribution of narrow beam irradiation for small lung tumor. , 2002, International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics.

[14]  M. G. Lötter,et al.  Comparison of the Batho, ETAR and Monte Carlo dose calculation methods in CT based patient models. , 2001, Medical physics.

[15]  J. E. O'Connor The variation of scattered x-rays with density in an irradiated body. , 1957, Physics in medicine and biology.

[16]  B. Bjärngard,et al.  Doses on the central axes of narrow 6-MV x-ray beams. , 1990, Medical physics.

[17]  M R Sontag,et al.  Corrections to absorbed dose calculations for tissue inhomogeneities. , 1977, Medical physics.

[18]  R. Henkelman,et al.  Reconsideration of the power-law (Batho) equation for inhomogeneity corrections. , 1982, Medical physics.

[19]  S. Rustgi,et al.  Dosimetric characterization of radiosurgical beams with a diamond detector. , 1995, Medical physics.

[20]  M Saiful Huq,et al.  Lateral loss and dose discrepancies of multileaf collimator segments in intensity modulated radiation therapy. , 2003, Medical physics.

[21]  L. W. Turner,et al.  Quantities and Units , 1991 .