SU‐E‐T‐512: Evaluation of Treatment Planning Dose Calculation Accuracy at the Interface of Prosthetic Devices

D. Paulu, Parham Alaei

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the ability of treatment planning algorithm to accurately predict dose delivered at the interface of high density implanted devices. Methods: A high density (7.6 g/cc) Cobalt‐Chromium‐Molybdenum hip prosthesis was molded into an epoxy‐based cylindrical leg phantom. The phantom was designed to be separated in half to access the prosthesis and to place the TLDs. Using MVCT to image the apparatus, a simple treatment plan was developed using the Philips Pinnacle treatment planning system. Wires were placed in the molded epoxy to allow for accurate definition of measurement sites (TLD positions) along the surface of the prosthesis. Micro‐cube TLDs (1 mm3) were placed at six measurement locations for which the dose had been calculated by the treatment planning system. An Elekta Synergy linear accelerator was used to deliver a 400 cGy plan to the phantom with 6 MV photons in a single fraction. A total of four 10 cm × 21 cm fields were used at 0, 90, 180, and 270 degree gantry rotations. Results: Initial results indicate that the measured dose is 7–17% lower than the dose calculated by the treatment planning system. Further study using high energy beams are also in progress. Conclusions: Initial results indicate that the treatment planning system does predict the dose near a high density prosthetic device within 10–15% but underestimates the dose. The results of this study could help in designing treatment plans which would reduce the uncertainty of the dose delivered in the vicinity of prosthetic hip implants and similar devices.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3823
Number of pages1
JournalMedical Physics
Volume39
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2012

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'SU‐E‐T‐512: Evaluation of Treatment Planning Dose Calculation Accuracy at the Interface of Prosthetic Devices'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this