We have located links that may give you full text access.
Technical note: A comparison of in-house 3D-printed and commercially available patient-specific skin collimators for use with electron beam therapy.
Journal of Applied Clinical Medical Physics 2024 April 27
PURPOSE: Skin collimation is a useful tool in electron beam therapy (EBT) to decrease the penumbra at the field edge and minimize dose to nearby superficial organs at risk (OARs), but manually fabricating these collimation devices in the clinic to conform to the patient's anatomy can be a difficult and time intensive process. This work compares two types of patient-specific skin collimation (in-house 3D printed and vendor-provided machined brass) using clinically relevant metrics.
METHODS: Attenuation measurements were performed to determine the thickness of each material needed to adequately shield both 6 and 9 MeV electron beams. Relative and absolute dose planes at various depths were measured using radiochromic film to compare the surface dose, flatness, and penumbra of the different skin collimation materials.
RESULTS: Clinically acceptable thicknesses of each material were determined for both 6 and 9 MeV electron beams. Field width, flatness, and penumbra results between the two systems were very similar and significantly improved compared to measurements performed with no surface collimation.
CONCLUSION: Both skin collimation methods investigated in this work generate sharp penumbras at the field edge and can minimize dose to superficial OARs compared to treatment fields with no surface collimation. The benefits of skin collimation are greatest for lower energy electron beams, and the benefits decrease as the measurement depth increases. Using bolus with skin collimation is recommended to avoid surface dose enhancement seen with collimators placed on the skin surface. Ultimately, the appropriate choice of material will depend on the desire to create these devices in-house or outsource the fabrication to a vendor.
METHODS: Attenuation measurements were performed to determine the thickness of each material needed to adequately shield both 6 and 9 MeV electron beams. Relative and absolute dose planes at various depths were measured using radiochromic film to compare the surface dose, flatness, and penumbra of the different skin collimation materials.
RESULTS: Clinically acceptable thicknesses of each material were determined for both 6 and 9 MeV electron beams. Field width, flatness, and penumbra results between the two systems were very similar and significantly improved compared to measurements performed with no surface collimation.
CONCLUSION: Both skin collimation methods investigated in this work generate sharp penumbras at the field edge and can minimize dose to superficial OARs compared to treatment fields with no surface collimation. The benefits of skin collimation are greatest for lower energy electron beams, and the benefits decrease as the measurement depth increases. Using bolus with skin collimation is recommended to avoid surface dose enhancement seen with collimators placed on the skin surface. Ultimately, the appropriate choice of material will depend on the desire to create these devices in-house or outsource the fabrication to a vendor.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Angiotensin Receptor Blocker-Neprilysin Inhibitor for Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction.Pharmacological Research : the Official Journal of the Italian Pharmacological Society 2024 May 12
Hemodynamic Support in Sepsis.Anesthesiology 2024 June 2
The Therapy and Management of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: New Insights on Treatment.Cardiac Failure Review 2024
European Respiratory Society Clinical Practice Guideline on symptom management for adults with serious respiratory illness.European Respiratory Journal 2024 May 9
Axillary Surgery for Breast Cancer in 2024.Cancers 2024 April 24
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app