Encrypted login | home

Program Information

Comparison of Intra-Operative Soft X-Rays to Low Energy Electron Beams for Treatment of Superficial Lesions

no image available
A Sethi

B Chinsky , A Diak , S Gros , A Sethi*, Loyola Univ Medical Center, Maywood, IL


SU-E-T-537 Sunday 3:00PM - 6:00PM Room: Exhibit Hall

Superficial soft x-ray applicators have recently been designed for use with existing intra-operative radiotherapy systems. These applicators may be used in treating superficial lesions which are conventionally treated with electron beams. The purpose of this abstract is to compare dose distributions of an intra-operative 50kV x-ray unit with low energy electrons for the treatment of superficial lesions.

Dosimetric parameters for 1 & 3-cm diameter Intrabeam superficial x-ray applicators were measured with EBT3 Gafchromic film in a solid water phantom. Depth dose distributions and profiles (d=2, 5, 10 and 15mm) were obtained by prescribing a dose of 400cGy at 5mm depth below the phantom surface. Corresponding dose profiles for 6-MeV electrons were acquired from a Varian Clinac 21EX at 100 SSD. H&D calibration curves were generated for each modality for 0-800cGy.

Dose coverage, penumbra, dose uniformity, surface dose, and dose fall-off were examined. Compared to electrons, Intrabeam lateral dose coverage at 5mm depth was 70% larger with a much sharper (1/4) penumbra. Electron isodose levels bulged with depth, whereas Intrabeam isodose levels exhibited a convex cone shape. The Intrabeam dose profiles demonstrated horns in the dose distribution up to a 5mm depth and an exponential dose fall-off. Relative surface dose was higher for the Intrabeam applicators. Treatment times were comparable for both modalities.

The very small penumbra of Intrabeam at shallow depths could be useful in treating superficial lesions adjacent to critical structures. The exponential dose fall-off of Intrabeam makes it appealing in the sparing of structures beyond the lesion. However, for lesions past a depth of 5mm, electrons would be desirable as they penetrate farther and provide skin sparing. Intrabeam may be preferable for sites that are difficult to treat with electrons due to mechanical and physical limitations.

Contact Email: