Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A comparison between EPSON V700 and EPSON V800 scanners for film dosimetry

  • Scientific Paper
  • Published:
Physical and Engineering Sciences in Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Radiochromic film is a good dosimeter choice for patient QA for complex treatment techniques (IMRT, VMAT, SABR, SBRT) because of its near tissue equivalency, very high spatial resolution and established method of use. Commercial scanners are usually used for film dosimetry, among which EPSON scanners are the most common. NCCI have used an EPSON V700 scanner, but recently acquired a new model EPSON V800 scanner. The purpose of this work was to evaluate any differences between these two scanners to consider whether they can be used interchangeably or not. Different aspects of film dosimetry, e.g. lateral response artefact (LRA) effect, orientation effect, scanner response etc., were compared. EBT3 films were irradiated with 40 × 40 cm2 field size 6 MV beams and scanned in both the scanners. The scanned images were read in ImageJ V1.49 software. The data obtained was then copied in MS Excel to compare the scanners. The V800 scanner causes more polarisation, which results in more LRA effect than for the V700 scanner. The responses of the scanners in all three colour channels are not the same for the same film and irradiation. The V800 scanner shows an increase of response of up to 1.6% compared to 3.7% increase in the V700 scanner after scanning a piece of irradiated film 20 times. The scanners cannot be used interchangeably. The correction factors for LRA effect and the calibration curves are different. Further characterisation, evaluation and commissioning is required before clinical use.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Klassen NV, Zwan L, Cygler J (1997) GafChromic MD-55: investigated as precision dosimeter. Med Phys 24(12):1924–1934

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Nirmand-Rad A, Balckwell C, Coursey N, Gall K, Galvin J, McLaughlin W, Meigoon A, Nath R, Rodgers J, Soares C (1998) Radiochromic film dosimetry: recommendations of AAPM radiation therapy committee task group 55. Med Phys 25(11):2093

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Aland T, Kairn T, Kenny J (2011) Evaluation of a gafchromic EBT2 film dosimetry system for radiotherapy quality assurance. Austalas Phys Eng Sci Med 34(2):251

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kairn T, Hardcastle N, Kenny J, Meldrum R, Tomé WA, Aland T (2011) EBT2 radiochromic film for quality assurance of complex IMRT treatments of the prostate: micro-collimated IMRT, RapidArc, and TomoTherapy. Austalas Phys Eng Sci Med 34(3):333

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Bennie N, Metcalfe P (2016) Practical IMRT QA dosimetry using Gafchromic film: a quick start guide. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 39(2):533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Butson MJ, Cheung T, Yu PKN (2006) Scanning orientation effect on Gafchromic EBT film dosimetry Australas. Phys Eng Sci Med 29(3):281

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Butson MJ, Cheung T, Yu PKN (2009) Evaluation of the magnitude of EBT Gafchromic film polarization effect. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 32(1):21

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Alnawaf H, Butson MJ, Cheung T, Yu PKN (2010) Scanning orientation and polarization effects for XRQA radiochromic film. Phys Med 26:216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schoenfeld AA, Poppinga D, Harder D, Doerner KJ, Poppe B (2014) The artefacts of radiochromic film with flatbed scanners and their causation by light scattering from radiation-induced polymers. Phys Med Biol 59:3575

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lewis D, Chan MF (2015) Correcting lateral response artifacts from flatbed scanners for radiochromic film dosimetry. Med Phys 42(1):416

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Van Battum LJ, Huizenga H, Verdaasdonk RM, Heukelom S (2016) How flatbed scanners upset accurate film dosimetry. Phys Med Biol 61:625

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schoenfeld AA, Harder D, Weiker S, Poppe B (2016) Changes pf the optical characteristics of radiochromic films in the transition from EBT3 to EBT-XD films. Phys Med Biol 61:5426

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Schoenfeld AA, Harder D, Weiker S, Poppe B (2016) Origin of the flatbed scanner artifacts in radiochromic film dosimetry-key experiment and theoretical descriptions. Phys Med Biol 61:7704

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Paelinck L, Neve WD, Wagter CD (2006) Precautions and strategies in using a commercial flatbed scanner for radiochromic film dosimetry. Phys Med Biol 52:231

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Larraga-Guiterrez JM, Garcia-Garduno OA, Trevino-Palacios C, Herrera-Gonzalez JA (2018) Evaluation of a LED-based flatbed document scanner for radiochromic film dosimetry in transmission mode. Phys Med 47:86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Matney JE, Parker BC, Neck DW, Henkelmann G, Rosen II (2010) Evaluation of a commercial flatbed scanner for radiochromic EBT film dosimetry. J Appl Clin Med Phys 11(2):198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Martisikova M, Ackermann B, Jakel O (2008) Analysis of uncertainties in Gafchromic EBT film dosimetry of photon beams. Phys Med Biol 53:7013

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. North Coast Cancer Institute, Lismore, NSW, Australia

    Tarafder Shameem & Nick Bennie

  2. School of Physics, Institute of Medical Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Tarafder Shameem, Martin Butson & David Thwaites

  3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Chris O’Brien Lifehouse, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Martin Butson

Authors
  1. Tarafder Shameem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nick Bennie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Martin Butson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David Thwaites
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tarafder Shameem.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animal experiments performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shameem, T., Bennie, N., Butson, M. et al. A comparison between EPSON V700 and EPSON V800 scanners for film dosimetry. Phys Eng Sci Med 43, 205–212 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-019-00837-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13246-019-00837-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation