Cited 0 times in
Clinical Efficacy of an Electronic Portal Imaging Device versus a Physical Phantom Tool for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | 김진성 | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-04-07T01:23:02Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2023-04-07T01:23:02Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2022-11 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 0024-3019 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/193904 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Pre-treatment patient-specific quality assurance (QA) is critical to prevent radiation accidents. The electronic portal imaging device (EPID) is a dose measurement tool with good resolution and a low volume-averaging effect. EPIbeam—an EPID-based portal dosimetry software—has been newly installed in three institutions in Korea. This study evaluated the efficacy of the EPID-based patient-specific QA tool versus the PTW729 detector (a previously used QA tool) based on gamma criteria and planning target volume (PTV). A significant difference was confirmed through the R statistical analysis software. The average gamma passing rates of PTW729 and EPIbeam were 98.73% and 99.60% on 3 mm/3% (local), 96.66% and 97.91% on 2 mm/2% (local), and 88.41% and 74.87% on 1 mm/1% (local), respectively. The p-values between them were 0.015 (3 mm/3%, local), 0.084 (2 mm/2%, local), and less than 0.01 (1 mm/1%, local). Further, the average gamma passing rates of PTW 729 and EPIbeam according to PTV size were 99.55% and 99.91% (PTV < 150 cm3) and 97.91% and 99.28% (PTV > 150 cm3), respectively. The p-values between them were 0.087 (PTV < 150 cm3) and 0.036 (PTV > 150 cm3). These results confirm that EPIbeam can be an effective patient-specific QA tool. | - |
dc.description.statementOfResponsibility | open | - |
dc.format | application/pdf | - |
dc.language | English | - |
dc.publisher | Time, Inc. | - |
dc.relation.isPartOf | Life | - |
dc.rights | CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR | - |
dc.title | Clinical Efficacy of an Electronic Portal Imaging Device versus a Physical Phantom Tool for Patient-Specific Quality Assurance | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.contributor.college | College of Medicine (의과대학) | - |
dc.contributor.department | Dept. of Radiation Oncology (방사선종양학교실) | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Seung-Hyeop Baek | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Sang-Hyoun Choi | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Moo-Jae Han | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Gyu-Seok Cho | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Wonil Jang | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Jin-Sung Kim | - |
dc.contributor.googleauthor | Kum-Bae Kim | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.3390/life12111923 | - |
dc.contributor.localId | A04548 | - |
dc.relation.journalcode | J03809 | - |
dc.identifier.pmid | 36431058 | - |
dc.contributor.alternativeName | Kim, Jinsung | - |
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthor | 김진성 | - |
dc.citation.volume | 12 | - |
dc.citation.number | 11 | - |
dc.citation.startPage | 1923 | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | Life, Vol.12(11) : 1923, 2022-11 | - |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.