Gamma Putty shielding effect in megavoltage photon beam

Aime M Gloi


Purpose: Traditionally, lead and Cerrobend have been employed for field shaping in radiation therapy. Lately, another shielding material called Gamma Putty has emerged. The objective of this report is to examine its dosimetric and shielding characteristics in megavoltage photon beam.

Methods: All measurements were carried out in a dual energy linac. Data were collected using a calibrated ionization chamber. Percent transmission, linear attenuation, and field size dependence were evaluated for open square fields (4 × 4 cm2 to 10 × 10 cm2) defined by collimator jaws and for different Gamma Putty thicknesses (t = 0, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 cm) at 6 and 18 MV photon beams. The measurements were performed both in air using appropriate acrylic buildup cap and in solid water.

Results: The Gamma Putty tray factor (GPTF) increased steadily with field size for both 6 and 18 MV. It was characterized by a half value thickness (HVT) of 2.513 ± 0.101 and 2.855 ± 0.024 cm for 6 and 18 MV, respectively. The reduction in surface dose was about 6%, 14.5%, 22%, 36.37%, and 54% for 6 MV and 2.75 %, 9.36 %, 16.25 %, 28.95 %, and 44.47 % for 18 MV for Gamma Putty thicknesses of 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 cm.

Conclusion: The result of Gamma Putty shielding on the photon beam output increases with thickness, beam energy, and field size. Therefore, clinical use of Gamma Putty tray factors should be tailored for all thicknesses, beam energies, and field sizes. 


Gamma Putty, Tray factor, Linear attenuation, Surface dose

Full Text:



Matsumoto Y, Umezu Y, Fujibuchi T, et al. Verification of the protective effect of a testicular shield in postoperative radiotherapy for seminoma. Nihon Hoshasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi. 2014;70(9):883–7.

Craciunescu OI, Steffey BA, Kelsey CR, et al. Renal shielding and dosimetry for patients with severe systemic sclerosis receiving immunoablation with total body irradiation in the scleroderma: cyclophosphamide or transplantation trial. Int J Radiat Oncol 2011;79(4):1248–55.

Purdy JA, Stiteler RD, Glasgow GP, et al. Gonadal Shield Radiology. 1975:117-226.

Sohn JW, Macklis R, Suh JH, et al. A mobile shield to reduce scatter radiation to the contralateral breastduring radiotherapy for breast cancer: preclinical results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1999;43(5):1037-41.

Toljanic JA, Saunders VW Jr. Radiation therapy and management of the irradiated patient. J Prosthet Dent. 1984;52:852-8.

Mantri SS, Bhasin AS, Shankaran G, et al. Scope of prosthodontic services for patients with head and neck cancer. Indian J Cancer. 2012;49:39-45.

Prabhakar R, Haresh KP, Sridhar PS, et al. Execution of mantle field with multileaf collimator: a simple approach. J Cancer Res Ther. 2008;4(1):18-20.

Shiu AS, Tung SS, Gastorf RJ, et al. Dosimetric evaluation of lead and tungsten eye shields in electron beam treatment. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1996;35:599–604.

Rustgi SN. Dose distribution under external eye shields for high energy electrons. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1986;12:141–4.

Weaver RDS, Gerbi BJ, Dusenbery KE. Evaluation of eye shields made of tungsten and aluminum in high-energy electron beams. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998;41:233–7.

Xu T, Shikhaliev PM, Al-Ghazi M, et al. Reshapable physical modulator for intensity modulated radiation therapy. Med Phys. 2002;29:2222–9.

Jiang SB, Ayyangar KM. On compensator design for photon beam intensity-modulated conformal therapy. Med Phys. 1998;25:668–75.

Du Plessis FCP, Willemse CA. Monte Carlo calculation of effective attenuation coefficient for various compensator materials. Med Phys. 2003;30:2537–43.

Khan FM. The physics of radiation therapy, Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore. 1994:323-32.

Kim S, Liu CR, Zhu TC, et al. Photon beam skin dose analyses for different clinical setups. Med Phys. 1998;25: 860-6.

Thomas SJ, Thomas RL. A beam generation algorithm for linear accelerators with independent collimators. Phys Med Biol. 1990;35(3):8.

Kwa W, Kornelsen RO, Harrison RW, et al. Dosimetry for asymmetric x-ray fields. Med Phys. 1994; 21(10):1599-604.

Ramaseshan R, Kohli K, Cao F, et al. Dosimetric evaluation of Plastic Water Diagnostic-Therapy. J Appl Clin Med Phys. 2008;9(2):2761.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.


International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology (ISSN 2330-4049)

© International Journal of Cancer Therapy and Oncology (IJCTO)

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the '' domain to your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.


Number of visits since October, 2013