Comparison of the absorbed dose measurement methods for high-energy electron beams
Yanyan Guo, Ping Bi, Xiaodong Li, Yue Dai
Abstract
Yanyan Guo, Ping Bi, Xiaodong Li, Yue Dai
Abstract
Objective To study the difference in the measurement of the absorbed dose in water between the dosimetry protocols of IAEA TRS-398 and TRS-277 for high-energy electron beams.Methods The differences were compare in absorbed doses from 6 kinds of electron beams among the three methods of using cylindrical chamber,plane-parallel chamber and cross-calibrated plane-parallel chamber which was calibrated in user' s high-energy electron beam according to IAEA TRS-398 and IAEA TRS-277.Results The difference in absorbed doses measured,following the two protocols,was 0.4%-2.3% for planeparallel chamber,0.6%-2.2% for cylindrical chamber,and 0.5%-2.0% for cross-calibrated chamber.The differences in measured absorbed doses between the two dosimetry protocols were slight.Conclusions The methods used to determine absorbed dose to water recommanded by IAEA TRS-398 for high-energy beams are more accurate and more suitable for clinical users to measure compared to the TRS-277. Key words: Radiotherapy; Dosimetry; Absorbed dose; Ionization chamber
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Objective To study the difference in the measurement of the absorbed dose in water between the dosimetry protocols of IAEA TRS-398 and TRS-277 for high-energy electron beams.Methods The differences were compare in absorbed doses from 6 kinds of electron beams among the three methods of using cylindrical chamber,plane-parallel chamber and cross-calibrated plane-parallel chamber which was calibrated in user' s high-energy electron beam according to IAEA TRS-398 and IAEA TRS-277.Results The difference in absorbed doses measured,following the two protocols,was 0.4%-2.3% for planeparallel chamber,0.6%-2.2% for cylindrical chamber,and 0.5%-2.0% for cross-calibrated chamber.The differences in measured absorbed doses between the two dosimetry protocols were slight.Conclusions The methods used to determine absorbed dose to water recommanded by IAEA TRS-398 for high-energy beams are more accurate and more suitable for clinical users to measure compared to the TRS-277. Key words: Radiotherapy; Dosimetry; Absorbed dose; Ionization chamber
Key concepts: Absorbed dose, Ionization chamber, Dosimetry, Nuclear medicine, Electron, Cathode ray, Beam (structure), Physics