Publications by authors named "Aydan Sonmez"

2 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Evaluation of field-in-field technique for total body irradiation.

Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2012 Aug 26;83(5):1641-8. Epub 2012 Jan 26.

Department of Radiation Oncology, Baskent University Faculty of Medicine, Adana, Turkey.

Purpose: To evaluate the clinical use of a field-in-field (FIF) technique for total body irradiation (TBI) using a treatment-planning system (TPS) and to verify TPS results with in vivo dose measurements using metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistor (MOSFET) detectors.

Methods And Materials: Clinical and dosimetric data of 10 patients treated with TBI were assessed. Certain radiation parameters were measured using homogenous and regular phantoms at an extended distance of 380 cm, and the results were compared with data from a conventional standard distance of 100 cm. Additionally, dosimetric validation of TPS doses was performed with a Rando phantom using manual calculations. A three-dimensional computed tomography plan was generated involving 18-MV photon beams with a TPS for both open-field and FIF techniques. The midline doses were measured at the head, neck, lung, umbilicus, and pelvis for both open-field and FIF techniques.

Results: All patients received planned TBI using the FIF technique with 18-MV photon energies and 2 Gy b.i.d. on 3 consecutive days. The difference in tissue maximum ratios between the extended and conventional distances was <2%. The mean deviation of manual calculations compared with TPS data was +1.6% (range, 0.1-2.4%). A homogenous dose distribution was obtained with 18-MV photon beams using the FIF technique. The mean lung dose for the FIF technique was 79.2% (9.2 Gy; range, 8.8-9.7 Gy) of the prescribed dose. The MOSFET readings and TPS doses in the body were similar (percentage difference range, -0.5% to 2.5%) and slightly higher in the shoulder and lung (percentage difference range, 4.0-5.5%).

Conclusion: The FIF technique used for TBI provides homogenous dose distribution and is feasible, simple, and spares time compared with more-complex techniques. The TPS doses were similar to the midline doses obtained from MOSFET readings.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2011.10.045DOI Listing
August 2012

Dosimetric comparison of the field-in-field technique and tangential wedged beams for breast irradiation.

Jpn J Radiol 2012 Apr 21;30(3):218-26. Epub 2011 Dec 21.

Department of Radiation Oncology, Adana Research and Treatment Centre, Baskent University Faculty of Medicine, 01120 Adana, Turkey.

Purpose: To analyze tangential wedged beam and field-in-field (FIF) technique doses using dose-volume histograms and conformality indices for target volume and healthy tissues within the irradiated volume.

Materials And Methods: Thirty patients treated with breast-conserving surgery and postoperative whole breast radiotherapy were enrolled. Three plans were generated: a standard tangential plan with either one outer field wedge or bilateral wedges, and an FIF plan. Three indices were used: the dose homogeneity index (DHI), PTV dose improvement index (PDI(index)) and geometric conformity index (g). Also ipsilateral lung, heart and contralateral breast doses were compared for each plan.

Results: Dose homogeneity index was significantly lower for the FIF (0.117 ± 0.021) than for the single wedge (0.131 ± 0.025, p = 0.02) and double wedged plan (0.128 ± 0.025, p = 0.04), respectively. The g was significantly less in the FIF (0.70 ± 0.14) compared to the wedge plans (0.80 ± 0.17, p = 0.02 and 0.83 ± 0.16, p = 0.003). Contralateral breast doses were significantly lower in the FIF plan. The FIF plan significantly lowered MU compared to both the single wedge and bilateral wedge plans.

Conclusion: The dose distribution within the target was more homogenous, and the doses for healthy tissue were less in the FIF plan compared to the tangential wedge plans.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11604-011-0034-7DOI Listing
April 2012