| 张雨,吴岱,袁继龙,等.三种剂量率仪对X射线FLASH放疗机房外散漏射线的测量结果比较分析[J].中华放射医学与防护杂志,2026,46(6):605-611.Zhang Yu,Wu Dai,Yuan Jilong,et al.Comparative analysis of leakage and scattered radiation measured using three types of dose rate meters outside X-ray FLASH radiotherapy treatment rooms[J].Chin J Radiol Med Prot,2026,46(6):605-611 |
| 三种剂量率仪对X射线FLASH放疗机房外散漏射线的测量结果比较分析 |
| Comparative analysis of leakage and scattered radiation measured using three types of dose rate meters outside X-ray FLASH radiotherapy treatment rooms |
| 投稿时间：2025-07-28 |
| DOI：10.3760/cma.j.cn112271-20250728-00271 |
| 中文关键词: 高能X射线|FLASH放疗|周围剂量当量率|辐射防护 |
| 英文关键词:High-energy X ray|FLASH radiotherapy|Ambient dose equivalent rate|Radiation protection |
| 基金项目:中国疾控中心辐射安全所青年基金人才成长计划项目(2024NA02) |
| 作者 | 单位 | E-mail | | 张雨 | 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核安全医学所 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核应急重点实验室, 北京 100088 | | | 吴岱 | 中国工程物理研究院应用电子学研究所, 绵阳 621900 | | | 袁继龙 | 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核安全医学所 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核应急重点实验室, 北京 100088 | | | 马向捷 | 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核安全医学所 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核应急重点实验室, 北京 100088 | | | 赵俏俏 | 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核安全医学所 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核应急重点实验室, 北京 100088 | | | 何志坚 | 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核安全医学所 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核应急重点实验室, 北京 100088 | | | 羊奕伟 | 中国工程物理研究院应用电子学研究所, 绵阳 621900 | | | 王建新 | 中国工程物理研究院应用电子学研究所, 绵阳 621900 | | | 程金生 | 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核安全医学所 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核应急重点实验室, 北京 100088 | | | 刘辉 | 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核安全医学所 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核应急重点实验室, 北京 100088 | liuhui@nirp.chinacdc.cn | | 陈佳和 | 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核安全医学所 中国疾病预防控制中心辐射防护与核应急重点实验室, 北京 100088 | |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 1715 |
| 全文下载次数: 29 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 通过对3种常见的剂量率仪(451P型、AT1123型、6150AD b/H型)在X射线FLASH放疗(XFLASH-RT)设备机房外测量得到的周围剂量当量率与理论计算值的比较与分析,为XFLASH-RT设备周围剂量当量率测量设备的选择和测量条件提供依据。方法 采用固体水模体模拟患者,设置3种参考点剂量率(6、100、150 Gy/s)和对应出束时间。根据辐射源项参数和机房屏蔽结构,依据GBZ/T 201.2-2011标准中的公式,计算西屏蔽墙外(距离机头最近)关注点的周围剂量当量率作为计算值。采用3种剂量率仪测量同一关注点的周围剂量当量率,将测量值与计算值进行比较,分析测量结果与计算值的偏差特性。结果 451P型和 6150AD b/H 型剂量率仪在各参考点剂量率条件下测量值均显著低于计算值:在参考点剂量率6 Gy/s时相对偏差分别大于-82.87%、-74.74%,在100 Gy/s时相对偏差分别大于-79.72%、-61.87%,在150 Gy/s时相对偏差分别大于-84.90%、-76.37%。AT1123型剂量率仪在参考点剂量率6 Gy/s时均未获有效测量结果;在100 Gy/s时其测量值随出束时间增加而增大,出束时间为 240 ms 时测量值与计算值基本一致;在 150 Gy/s时其测量值随出束时间增加而增大,出束时间为 160 ms 时相对偏差为-17.51%。插值分析表明,AT1123 达到计算值90% 所对应的出束时间分别为 170和202 ms。结论 451P型、6150AD b/H型剂量率仪因响应时间较长,不建议用于本研究机房外周围剂量当量率的测量;AT1123型剂量率仪在一定条件下能较正确反映机房外周围剂量当量率,后续需结合具体脉冲时间结构与剂量率水平再分析使用。同时,有必要根据XFLASH-RT的特点,研发针对XFLASH-RT超高剂量率的辐射防护监测仪器。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To compare and analyze the ambient dose equivalent rates measured using three types of commonly used meters (451P, AT1123, and 6150AD b/H) outside the treatment room of an X-ray FLASH radiotherapy device against theoretical calculations, thereby providing a basis for selecting instruments conditions for such measurements. Methods A solid water phantom was used to simulate a patient. Reference dose rates were set at 6, 100, and 150 Gy/s, respectively, also with the corresponding irradiation time. Based on the radiation source term parameters and the shielding structure of the treatment room, the ambient dose equivalent rate at a point of interest outside the west shielding wall (closest to the accelerator head) was calculated using the formula specified in GBZ/T 201.2-2011. Measurements at the same point were performed using the three types of dose rate meters, and the measured values were compared with the calculated values to analyze the deviation characteristics. Results The measured values on the 451P and 6150AD b/H meters were significantly lower than the calculated values under all reference dose rate conditions. The relative deviations were greater than -82.87% and -74.74% at 6 Gy/s, greater than -79.72% and -61.87% at 100 Gy/s, and greater than -84.90% and -76.37% at 150 Gy/s, respectively. The AT1123 failed to provide valid measurements at 6 Gy/s. At 100 Gy/s, its measured value increases with increasing beam-on time, reaching rough consistency at 240 ms. At 150 Gy/s, its measured value increases with increasing beam-on time, with a relative deviation of -17.51% at 160 ms. Interpolation analysis shows that the beam-on time required for using the AT1123 to reach 90% of the calculated value are 170 and 202 ms, respectively. Conclusions Due to their relatively long response time, the rate meters 451P and 6150AD b/H are not recommended for measuring ambient dose equivalent rates under the conditions of this study. Under certain conditions, the AT1123 detector can provide a reasonably accurate measurement of the ambient dose equivalent rate outside the radiotherapy room in the certain conditions. However, continued analysis should be conducted on the basis of taking into account specific pulse time structures and dose rate levels. At the same time, it is necessary to develop radiation protection monitoring instruments specifically designed for the ultra-high dose rate based on the characteristics of X-ray (FLASH radiotherapy). |
| HTML 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|