Open Access


Read more
image01

Online Manuscript Submission


Read more
image01

Submitted Manuscript Trail


Read more
image01

Online Payment


Read more
image01

Online Subscription


Read more
image01

Email Alert



Read more
image01

Original Research Article | OPEN ACCESS

Comparison of the effectiveness of polymer gel dosimeters (Magic and Pagatug) for organ dose calculation in brachytherapy, nuclear medicine and teletherapy

Karim Adinehvand1, Dariush Sardari1 , Mohammad Hosntalab1, Majid Pouladian2

1Department of Medical Radiation Engineering; 2Biomedical Engineering Department, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.

For correspondence:-  Dariush Sardari   Email: sardari@srbiau.ac.ir

Accepted: 7 October 2017        Published: 30 November 2017

Citation: Adinehvand K, Sardari D, Hosntalab M, Pouladian M. Comparison of the effectiveness of polymer gel dosimeters (Magic and Pagatug) for organ dose calculation in brachytherapy, nuclear medicine and teletherapy. Trop J Pharm Res 2017; 16(11):2735-2740 doi: 10.4314/tjpr.v16i11.22

© 2017 The authors.
This is an Open Access article that uses a funding model which does not charge readers or their institutions for access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) and the Budapest Open Access Initiative (http://www.budapestopenaccessinitiative.org/read), which permit unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited..

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate and compare two polymer gel dosimeters, Magic and Pagatug, as organ dosimeters for 3D measurement of dose distribution in brachytherapy, nuclear medicine and teletherapy.
Methods: Magic and Pagatug polymer gels were compared with soft tissue based on irradiation with low energy photons during therapeutic applications. Comparison was simulated using Monte-Carlo-based MCNPX code. ORNL phantom–Female was used to model some vital organs (kidneys, ovaries and uterus). The right kidney was proposed to be the source of irradiation and the two organs were exposed to this irradiation.
Results: The effective atomic numbers of soft tissue, Magic and Pagatug were 6.86134, 7.07 and 7.2884, respectively. The results showed that Magic and Pagatug, were comparable to soft tissue with regard to application in nuclear medicine and teletherapy. Differences between gel dosimeters and soft tissue were defined as the dose responses. This difference was < 8.1, < 4 and < 76.8 % for teletherapy, nuclear medicine and brachytherapy, respectively.
Conclusion: Due to slight differences between the effective atomic numbers of these polymer gel dosimeters and soft tissue, the polymer gels are not suitable for brachytherapy since the photoelectric interaction is dominant for low energy photons, and the interaction relates to Z4. The results demonstrate that the gel dosimeters are best suited for nuclear medicine
 

Keywords: Magic, Pagatug, Brachytherapy, Nuclear medicine, Teletherapy, Organ dosimetry, Soft tissue

Impact Factor
Thompson Reuters (ISI): 0.523 (2021)
H-5 index (Google Scholar): 39 (2021)

Article Tools

Share this article with



Article status: Free
Fulltext in PDF
Similar articles in Google
Similar article in this Journal:

Archives

2024; 23: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2023; 22: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2022; 21: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2021; 20: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2020; 19: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2019; 18: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2018; 17: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2017; 16: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2016; 15: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2015; 14: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2014; 13: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6,   7,   8,   9,   10,   11,   12
2013; 12: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2012; 11: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2011; 10: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2010; 9: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2009; 8: 
1,   2,   3,   4,   5,   6
2008; 7: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2007; 6: 
1,   2,   3,   4
2006; 5: 
1,   2
2005; 4: 
1,   2
2004; 3: 
1
2003; 2: 
1,   2
2002; 1: 
1,   2

News Updates