Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Image guided radiotherapy allows for particularly conformal tumour irradiation through precise patient positioning. Becoming the standard for radiotherapy, this increases imaging doses to the patient. The Halcyon 3.0 linear accelerator (Varian Medical Systems, Palo Alto, CA) requires daily imaging due to its geometry. For this reason, the accelerator is equipped with on-line kV and MV imaging. However, daily CBCT images required for irradiation apply additional radiation, which increases the dose to normal tissue and therefore can affect the patient's secondary cancer risk. In this study, actual organ doses were measured for the kV system, and a comparison of normal tissue doses for all available kV CBCT protocols was presented to demonstrate differences in imaging doses across entities and protocols. In addition, effective dose and secondary cancer risk from imaging are evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Measurements were performed with thermoluminescent dosimeters in an anthropomorphic phantom positioned according to each entity (brain, head and neck, breast, lung, pelvis). CBCT images were obtained, using all available pre-set protocols without further adjustment of the parameters. Measured doses for each position and each protocol were then compared and secondary cancer risk of relevant and specifically radiosensitive organs was calculated. RESULTS: It was found that imaging doses for protocols such as Pelvis and Head could be reduced by up to half using the corresponding Fast and Low Dose modes, respectively. On the other hand, larger field sizes or the Large mode yielded higher doses than their initial protocols. Image Gently was found to spare normal tissue best, however it is not suitable for certain entities due to low image quality or insufficient projection data. DISCUSSION: By using appropriate kV-CBCT protocols, it is possible to reduce imaging doses to a significant extent and therefore spare healthy tissue. Combined with studies of image quality, the results of this study could lead to adjustments in workflow regarding the choice of protocols used in daily routine. This could prevent unnecessary radiation exposure and reduce secondary cancer risk.