Ji Hoon Park, Tae Gyu Kim, Soon Ki Min and Byung Do Park
Abstract Objectives: The purpose of this study is to investigate the comparison of 3DVH software and two-dimensional array systems (MatriXX, ArcCHECK, and portal dosimetry system) on pretreatment verification for volumetricmodulated arc therapy. Methods: Dosimetric measurements were performed using the verification for 20 treatment plans. Measured dosimetric differences were evaluated by gamma pass rate and percentage dose difference. Dose-volume histograms (DVHs) calculated by the treatment planning system were also compared with those predicted by the 3DVH software. Results: The mean gamma pass rates were more than 95% for the 3%/3 mm criterion, except for 3D evaluation using the 3DVH (3DVH (3D)) software in prostate cancer cases. In the cases of head-and-neck (HN) cancer, the mean gamma pass rates by ArcCHECK and 3DVH 2D evaluation (3DVH (2D)) were estimated to be lower than those of MatriXX, EPID, and 3DVH (3D) for the 2%/2 mm and 1%/1 mm criteria. The percentage dose differences were within 4% for all structures, and correlated with the mean gamma pass rate for the planning target volume (PTV) and the Dmean of the spinal cord (p < 0.05). On the other hand, the mean gamma pass rates of prostate cases presented similar results for all criteria. The percentage dose differences for structure volumes in the cases of prostate cancer (from 2.76% to 12.58%) were larger than those in the cases of HN cancer, and there was no statistical significance except for the Dmax of the bladder. Conclusion: Judging from our results, the three dosimetric devices showed similar results for pretreatment verification and portal dosimetry can be replaced as the verification system. However, the use of 3DVH software remains to be a matter for further discussion.
分享此文章
English 
Spanish 
Russian 
German 
French 
Japanese 
Portuguese 
Hindi 