Suitability of novel 3D-printed and coated vessels for water calorimetry

BACKGROUND

In water calorimetry, absolute dose to water is determined by measuring radiation-induced temperature rises. In conventional water calorimeters, temperature detectors are housed in handmade glass vessels that are filled with high-purity water, thus mitigating radiation-induced exo/endothermic chemical reactions of impurities that would otherwise introduce additional heat gain/loss, known as heat defect. Being hand-crafted, these glass vessels may suffer from imperfections, have shape and design constraints, are often backordered, and can be prohibitively expensive.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this work is to determine suitability of 3D-printed plastic vessels that are further coated for use in water calorimetry applications, and to study their stability and characterize their associated heat defect correction factor (k hd ) ${k_{{\mathrm{hd}}}})$ . This novel vessel production technique would allow for cost-effective rapid construction of vessels that can be produced with high accuracy and designs that are simply not practical with current glass vessel construction techniques. This in turn enables water calorimetry applications in many novel radiation delivery modalities, which may include spherical vessels in GammaKnife ICON water calorimetry as an example.

METHODS

Eight vessels were 3D-printed using Accura ClearVue in an SLA 3D-printer. Two vessels were coated with Parylene C and four were coated with Parylene N. The water calorimetry preparation procedures followed for these vessels was identical to that of our traditional glass-vessels (i.e., same cleaning procedures, same high purity water, and same saturation procedures with high purity hydrogen gas). The performance of each vessel was characterized using our in-house built water calorimeter in an Elekta Versa using both 6 MV flattening filter-free (FFF) and 18 MV beams. The stability of the coating as function of time and accumulated dose was evaluated through repeated measurements.k hd ${k_{{\mathrm{hd}}}}\;$ of each vessel was determined through cross-comparisons against an Exradin A1SL ionization chamber with direction calibration link to Canada's primary standard laboratory.

RESULTS

k HD ${k_{{\mathrm{HD}}}}\;$ of the two uncoated vessels differed by 2.8% under a 6 MV FFF beam. Vessels coated with Parylenes resulted in a stable and reproducible heat defect for both energies. An overallk hd ${k_{{\mathrm{hd}}}}$ of 1.001 ± 0.010 and 1.005 ± 0.010 were obtained for Parylene N and Parylene C coated vessels respectively. All Parylene coated vessels showed agreement, within the established uncertainties, to the zero-heat defect observed in a hydrogen-saturated glass vessel system. An additional long-term study (17 days) of a Parylene N vessel showed no change in response with accumulated dose and time. Electron microscopy images of a Parylene N coated vessel showed a uniform intact coating after repeated irradiations.

CONCLUSIONS

An uncoated 3D-printed vessel is not viable for water calorimetry because it exhibits an unstable vessel-dependent heat defect. However, applying a Parylene coating stabilizes the heat defect, suggesting that coated 3D-printed vessels may be suitable for use in water calorimetry. This method facilitates the creation of intricate vessel shapes, which can be efficiently manufactured using 3D printing.

AAPM WGTG51 Report 385: Addendum to the AAPM's TG-51 protocol for clinical reference dosimetry of high-energy electron beams

An Addendum to the AAPM's TG-51 protocol for the determination of absorbed dose to water is presented for electron beams with energies between 4 MeV and 22 MeV (1.70 cm ≤ R 50 ≤ 8.70 cm $1.70\nobreakspace {\rm cm} \le R_{\text{50}} \le 8.70\nobreakspace {\rm cm}$ ). This updated formalism allows simplified calibration procedures, including the use of calibrated cylindrical ionization chambers in all electron beams without the use of a gradient correction. Newk Q $k_{Q}$ data are provided for electron beams based on Monte Carlo simulations. Implementation guidance is provided. Components of the uncertainty budget in determining absorbed dose to water at the reference depth are discussed. Specifications for a reference-class chamber in electron beams include chamber stability, settling, ion recombination behavior, and polarity dependence. Progress in electron beam reference dosimetry is reviewed. Although this report introduces some major changes (e.g., gradient corrections are implicitly included in the electron beam quality conversion factors), they serve to simplify the calibration procedure. Results for absorbed dose per linac monitor unit are expected to be up to approximately 2 % higher using this Addendum compared to using the original TG-51 protocol.

Monte Carlo-calculated beam quality and perturbation correction factors validated against experiments for Farmer and Markus type ionization chambers in therapeutic carbon-ion beams

Objective. In current dosimetry protocols, the estimated uncertainty of the measured absorbed dose to waterDwin carbon-ion beams is approximately 3%. This large uncertainty is mainly contributed by the standard uncertainty of the beam quality correction factorkQ. In this study, thekQvalues in four cylindrical chambers and two plane-parallel chambers were calculated using Monte Carlo (MC) simulations in the plateau region. The chamber-specific perturbation correction factorPof each chamber was also determined through MC simulations.Approach.kQfor each chamber was calculated using MC code Geant4. The simulatedkQratios in subjected chambers and reference chambers were validated through comparisons against our measured values. In the measurements in Heavy-Ion Medical Accelerator in Chiba,kQratios were obtained fromDwvalues of60Co, 290- and 400 MeV u-1carbon-ion beams that were measured with the subjected ionization chamber and the reference chamber. In the simulations,fQ(the product of the water-to-air stopping power ratio andP) was acquired fromDwand the absorbed dose to air calculated in the sensitive volume of each chamber.kQvalues were then calculated from the simulatedfQand the literature-extractedWairand compared with previous publications.Main results. The calculatedkQratios in the subjected chambers to the reference chamber agreed well with the measuredkQratios. ThekQuncertainty was reduced from the current recommendation of approximately 3% to 1.7%. ThePvalues were close to unity in the cylindrical chambers and nearly 1% above unity in the plane-parallel chambers.Significance. ThekQvalues of carbon-ion beams were accurately calculated in MC simulations and thekQratios were validated through ionization chamber measurements. The results indicate a need for updating the current recommendations, which assume a constantPof unity in carbon-ion beams, to recommendations that consider chamber-induced differences.

Stopping-power ratios for electron beams used in total skin electron therapy

PURPOSE

The electron beams for total skin electron therapy (TSET) are often degraded by a scatter plate in addition to extended distances. For electron dosimetry, both the AAPM TG-51 and IAEA TRS-398 recommend the use of two formulas developed by Burns et al [Med. Phys. 23, 489-501 (1996)] to estimate the water-to-air stopping-power ratios (SPRs). Both formulas are based on a fit to SPRs calculated for standard electron beams. This study aims to find: (1) if the formulas are applicable to beams used in TSET and (2) the impact of the ICRU report 90 recommendations on the SPRs for these beams.

METHODS

The EGSnrc Monte Carlo code system is used to generate 6 MeV high dose rate total skin electron (HDTSe) beams used in TSET. The simulated beams are used to calculate dose distributions and SPRs as a function of depth in a water phantom. The fitted SPRs using the empirical formulas are compared with MC-calculated SPRs.

RESULTS

The electron beam quality specifier, the depth in water at which the absorbed dose falls to 50% of its maximum value, R₅₀ , decreases approximately 1 mm for each additional 100-cm extended distance ranging from 2.24 cm at SSD = 100 to 1.72 cm at SSD = 700 cm. For beams passing through a scatter plate, R₅₀ is 1.76 cm (1.14) at SSD = 300 and 1.48 cm (0.85 cm) at SSD = 600 cm with an Acrylic plate thickness of 3 mm (9 mm), respectively. The discrepancy between fitted and MC-calculated SPRs at d_ref as a function of R₅₀ is <0.8%, and in many cases <0.4%. The difference between fitted and MC-calculated SPRs as a function of depth and R₅₀ is within 1% at depths <0.8R₅₀ for beams with R₅₀  ≥ 1.14 cm. The ICRU-90 recommendations decrease SPRs by 0.3%-0.4% compared to the use of data recommended in ICRU-37.

CONCLUSION

The formulas used by the major protocols are accurate enough for clinical beams used in TSET and the error caused using the formulas is <1% to estimate SPRs as a function of depth and R₅₀ for depths <0.8R₅₀ for beams used in TSET with R₅₀  ≥ 1.14 cm. The impact of the ICRU-90 recommendations shows a decrease of SPRs by a fraction of a percent for beams used in TSET.

First-stage validation of a portable imageable MR-compatible water calorimeter

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to design a water calorimeter with three goals in mind: (a) To be fully magnetic resonance (MR)-compatible; (b) To be imaged using kV cone beam computed tomography (CBCT), MV portal imaging or MRI for accurate positioning; (c) To accommodate both vertical and horizontal beam incidence, as well as volumetric deliveries or Gamma Knife®. Following this, the calorimeter performance will be measured using an accelerator-based high-energy photon beam.

METHODS

A portable 4°C cooled stagnant water calorimeter was built using MR-compatible materials. The walls consist of layers of acrylic plastic, aerogel-based material acting as thermal insulation, as well as tubing for coolant to flow to keep the calorimeter temperature stable at 4°C. The lid contains additional pathways for coolant to flow through as well as two hydraulically driven stirrers. The water calorimeter was positioned in an Elekta Versa using kV CBCT imaging as well as orthogonal MV image pairs. Absolute absorbed dose to water was then determined under a 6 MV flattening filter-free (FFF) beam. This was compared against reference dosimetry results that were measured under identical conditions with an Exradin A1SL ionization chamber with a calibration coefficient directly traceable to the National Research Council Canada.

RESULTS

The dose to water determined with the calorimeter (n = 30) agreed with the A1SL ionization chamber reference dose measurements (n = 15) to within 0.25%. The uncertainty associated with the water calorimeter absorbed dose measurement was estimated to be 0.54% (k = 1).

CONCLUSIONS

An MR-compatible water calorimeter was successfully built and absolute absorbed dose to water under a conventional 6 MV FFF beam was determined successfully as a first-stage validation of the system.

A modified formalism for electron beam reference dosimetry to improve the accuracy of linac output calibration

PURPOSE

To present and demonstrate the accuracy of a modified formalism for electron beam reference dosimetry using updated Monte Carlo calculated beam quality conversion factors.

METHODS

The proposed, simplified formalism allows the use of cylindrical ionization chambers in all electron beams (even those with low beam energies) and does not require a measured gradient correction factor. Data from a previous publication are used for beam quality conversion factors. The formalism is tested and compared to the present formalism in the AAPM TG-51 protocol with measurements made in Elekta Precise electron beams with energies between 4 MeV and 22 MeV and with fields shaped with a 10 × 10 cm² clinical applicator as well as a 20 × 20 cm² clinical applicator for the 18 MeV and 22 MeV beams. A set of six ionization chambers are used for measurements (two cylindical reference-class chambers, two scanning-type chambers and two parallel-plate chambers). Dose per monitor unit is derived using the data and formalism provided in the TG-51 protocol and with the proposed formalism and data and compared to that obtained using ionization chambers calibrated directly against primary standards for absorbed dose in electron beams.

RESULTS

The standard deviation of results using different chambers when TG-51 is followed strictly is on the order of 0.4% when parallel-plate chambers are cross-calibrated against cylindrical chambers. However, if parallel-plate chambers are directly calibrated in a cobalt-60 beam, the difference between results for these chambers is up to 2.2%. Using the proposed formalism and either directly calibrated or cross-calibrated parallel-plate chambers gives a standard deviation using different chambers of 0.4%. The difference between results that use TG-51 and the primary standard measurements are on the order of 0.6% with a maximum difference in the 4 MeV beam of 2.8%. Comparing the results obtained with the proposed formalism and the primary standard measurements are on the order of 0.4% with a maximum difference of 1.0% in the 4 MeV beam.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed formalism and the use of updated data for beam quality conversion factors improves the consistency of results obtained with different chamber types and improves the accuracy of reference dosimetry measurements. Moreover, it is simpler than the present formalism and will be straightforward to implement clinically.