Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 7, 2025
Irradiator Commissioning and Dosimetry for Assessment of LQ α and β Parameters, Radiation Dosing Schema, and in vivo Dose Deposition
Published on: March 11, 2021
Replacing gamma knife beam-profiles on film with point-detector scans
Benedikt Rudek1, Kenneth Bernstein1, Sunshine Osterman2
1Department of Radiation Oncology, Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Health, New York, New York, USA.
Purpose:
Detector arrays and profile-scans have widely replaced film-measurements for quality assurance (QA) on linear accelerators. Film is still used for relative output factor (ROF) measurements, positioning, and dose-profile verification for annual Leksell Gamma Knife (LGK) QA. This study shows that small-field active detector measurements can be performed in the easily accessed clinical mode and that they are an effective replacement to time-consuming and exacting film measurements.
Methods:
Beam profiles and positioning scans for 4-mm, 8-mm, and 16-mm-collimated fields were collected along the x-, y-, and z-axes. The Exradin W2-scintillator and the PTW microdiamond-detector were placed in custom inserts centered in the Elekta solid-water phantom for these scans. GafChromic EBT3-film was irradiated with single uniformly collimated exposures as the clinical-standard reference, using the same solid-water phantom for profile tests and the Elekta film holder for radiation focal point (RFP)/patient-positioning system (PPS) coincidence. All experimental data were compared to the tissue-maximum-ratio-based (TMR10) dose calculation.
Results:
The detector-measured beam profiles and film-based profiles showed excellent agreement with TMR10-predicted full-width, half-maximum (FWHM) values. Absolute differences between the measured FWHM and FWHM from the treatment-planning system were on average 0.13 mm, 0.08 mm, and 0.04 mm for film, microdiamond, and scintillator, respectively. The coincidence between the RFP and the PPS was measured to be ≤0.5 mm with microdiamond, ≤0.41 mm with the W2-1 × 1 scintillator, and ≤0.22 mm using the film-technique.
Conclusions:
Small-volume field detectors, used in conjunction with a clinically available phantom, an electrometer with data-logging, and treatment plans created in clinical mode offer an efficient and viable alternative for film-based profile tests. Position verification can be accurately performed when CBCT-imaging is available to correct for residual detector-position uncertainty. Scans are easily set up within the treatment-planning-system and, when coupled with an automated analysis, can provide accurate measurements within minutes.
