Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Oct 17;4(10):e00864.
doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2018.e00864. eCollection 2018 Oct.

Effect of scanning parameters on dose-response of radiochromic films irradiated with photon and electron beams

Affiliations

Effect of scanning parameters on dose-response of radiochromic films irradiated with photon and electron beams

Nashrulhaq Tagiling et al. Heliyon. .

Abstract

Proper dosimetry settings are crucial in radiotherapy to ensure accurate radiation dose delivery. This work evaluated scanning parameters as affecting factors in reading the dose-response of EBT2 and EBT3 radiochromic films (RCFs) irradiated with clinical photon and electron beams. The RCFs were digitised using Epson® Expression® 10000XL flatbed scanner and image analyses of net optical density (netOD) were conducted using five scanning parameters i.e. film type, resolution, image bit depth, colour to grayscale transformation and image inversion. The results showed that increasing spatial resolution and deepening colour depth did not improve film sensitivity, while grayscale scanning caused sensitivity reduction below than that detected in the Red-channel. It is also evident that invert and colour negative film type selection negated netOD values, hence unsuitable for scanning RCFs. In conclusion, choosing appropriate scanning parameters are important to maintain preciseness and reproducibility in films dosimetry.

Keywords: Nuclear physics.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Default dose-response curves of irradiated EBT2 films (A) and EBT3 films (B) for photon and electron beams.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Dose-response comparison of colour positive and colour negative film type parameter for EBT2 and EBT3 films (A, B) with the corresponding relative netOD difference percentages (C, D) across four beam energies.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Dose-response comparison of three spatial resolutions for EBT2 and EBT3 films (A, B) with the corresponding relative netOD difference percentages (C, D) across four beam energies.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Dose-response comparison of three different image bit depths for EBT2 and EBT3 films (A, B) with the corresponding relative netOD difference percentages (C, D) across four beam energies.
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Dose-response curves of colour to grayscale transformation and its netOD Rdiff percentages for EBT2 films (A, C) and EBT3 films (B, D) in photon and electron beams.
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Dose-response curves of image inversion and its netOD Rdiff percentages for EBT2 films (A, C) and EBT3 films (B, D) in photon and electron beams.
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Dose-response curves of grayscale type and its netOD Rdiff percentages for EBT2 films (A, C) and EBT3 films (B, D) in photon and electron beams.

References

    1. McLaughlin W.L., AlSheikhly M., Lewis D.F., Kovacs A., Wojnarovits L. Radiochromic solid-state polymerization reaction. ACS Sym. Ser. 1996;620:152–166.
    1. Das I.J. CRC Press; Boca Raton, FL: 2018. Radiochromic Film Role and Applications in Radiation Dosimetry. 386 p.
    1. Desroches J., Bouchard H., Lacroix F. Potential errors in optical density measurements due to scanning side in EBT and EBT2 Gafchromic film dosimetry. Med. Phys. 2010;37(4):1565–1570. - PubMed
    1. Devic S., Seuntjens J., Sham E., Podgorsak E.B., Schmidtlein C.R., Kirov A.S. Precise radiochromic film dosimetry using a flat-bed document scanner. Med. Phys. 2005;32(7):2245–2253. - PubMed
    1. Sorriaux J., Kacperek A., Rossomme S., Lee J.A., Bertrand D., Vynckier S. Evaluation of Gafchromic(R) EBT3 films characteristics in therapy photon, electron and proton beams. Phys. Med. 2013;29(6):599–606. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources