A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Relative profile measurements in 1.5T MR-linacs: investigation of central axis deviations. | LitMetric

. In 1.5 T MR-linacs, the absorbed dose central axis (CAX) deviates from the beam's CAX due to inherent profile asymmetry. In addition, a measured CAX deviation may be biased due to potential lateral (to the beam) effective point of measurement (EPOML) shifts of the detector employed. By investigating CAX deviations, the scope of this study is to determine a set ofEPOMLshifts for profile measurements in 1.5 T MR-linacs.. The Semiflex 3D ion chamber and microDiamond detector (PTW, Germany) were considered in the experimental study while three more detectors were included in the Monte Carlo (MC) study. CAX deviations in the crossline and inline profiles were calculated based on inflection points of the 10×10 cmfield, at five centers. In MC simulations, the experimental setup was reproduced. A small water voxel was simulated to calculate CAX deviation without the impact of the detector-specificEPOMLshift.. All measurements were consistent among the five centers. MC-based and experimental measurements were in agreement within uncertainties. Placing the microDiamond in the vertical orientation does not appear to affect the detector'sEPOML, which is on its central longitudinal axis. For the Semiflex 3D in the crossline direction, the CAX deviation was 2.3 mm, i.e. 1 mm larger than the ones measured using the microDiamond and simulated considering the ideal water detector. Thus, anEPOMLshift of 1 mm is recommended for crossline profile measurements under both Semiflex 3D orientations. For the inline profile, anEPOMLshift of -0.5 mm was determined only for the parallel configuration. In the MC study, CAX deviations were found detector- and orientation-dependent. The dead volume is responsible for theEPOMLshift only in the inline profile and under the parallel orientation.. This work contributes to data availability on the correction or mitigation of the magnetic field-induced changes in the detectors' response.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1361-6560/ad6ed7DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

profile measurements
12
cax deviation
12
cax deviations
12
central axis
8
cax
8
study cax
8
inline profile
8
measurements
5
profile
5
relative profile
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!