Search

Background: There is increased interest in in vivo dosimetry for 192Ir brachytherapy (BT) treatments using high atomic number (Z) inorganic scintillators. Their high light output enables construction of small detectors with negligible stem effect and simple readout electronics. Experimental determination of absorbed‐dose energy dependence of detectors relative to water is prevalent, but it can be prone to high detector positioning uncertainties and does not allow for decoupling of absorbed‐dose energy dependence from other factors affecting detector response. Purpose: To investigate which measurement conditions and detector properties could affect their absorbed‐dose energy dependence in BT in vivo dosimetry. Methods: We used a general‐purpose Monte Carlo (MC) code PENELOPE for the characterization of high‐Z inorganic scintillators with the focus on ZnSe (Z¯=32$\bar{Z}=32$) Z. Two other promising media CsI (Z¯=54$\bar{Z}=54$) and Al2O3 (Z¯=11$\bar{Z}=11$) were included for comparison in selected scenarios. We determined absorbed‐dose energy dependence of crystals relative to water under different scatter conditions (calibration phantom 12 × 12 × 30 cm3, characterization phantoms 20 × 20 × 20 cm3, 30 × 30 × 30 cm3, 40 × 40 × 40 cm3, and patient‐like elliptic phantom 40 × 30 × 25 cm3). To mimic irradiation conditions during prostate treatments, we evaluated whether the presence of pelvic bones and calcifications affect ZnSe response. ZnSe detector design influence was also investigated. Results: In contrast to low‐Z organic and medium‐Z inorganic scintillators, ZnSe and CsI media have substantially greater absorbed‐dose energy dependence relative to water. The response was phantom‐size dependent and changed by 11% between limited‐ and full‐scatter conditions for ZnSe, but not for Al2O3. For a given phantom size, a part of the absorbed‐dose energy dependence of ZnSe is caused not due to in‐phantom scatter but due to source anisotropy. Thus, the absorbed‐dose energy dependence of high‐Z scintillators is a function of not only the radial distance but also the polar angle. Pelvic bones did not affect ZnSe response, whereas large and intermediate size calcifications reduced it by 9% and 5%, respectively, when placed midway between the source and the detector. Conclusions: Unlike currently prevalent low‐ and medium‐Z scintillators, high‐Z crystals are sensitive to characterization and in vivo measurement conditions. However, good agreement between MC data for ZnSe in the present study and experimental data for ZnSe:O by Jørgensen et al. (2021) suggests that detector signal is proportional to the average absorbed dose to the detector cavity. This enables an easy correction for non‐TG43‐like scenarios (e.g., patient sizes and calcifications) through MC simulations. Such information should be provided to the clinic by the detector vendors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: High‐dose rate (HDR) and pulsed‐dose rate (PDR) brachytherapy would benefit from an independent treatment verification system to monitor treatment delivery and to detect errors in real time. This paper characterizes and provides an uncertainty budget for a detector based on a fiber‐coupled high‐Z inorganic scintillator capable of performing time‐resolved in vivo dosimetry during HDR and PDR brachytherapy. Method: The detector was composed of a detector probe and an optical reader. The detector probe consisted of either a 0.5 × 0.4 × 0.4 mm3 (HDR) or a 1.0 × 0.4 × 0.4 mm3 (PDR) cuboid ZnSe:O crystal glued onto an optical‐fiber cable. The outer diameter of the detector probes was 1 mm, and fit inside standard brachytherapy catheters. The signal from the detector probe was read out at 20 Hz by a photodiode and a data acquisition device inside the optical reader. In order to construct an uncertainty budget for the detector, six characteristics were determined: (1) temperature dependence of the detector probe, (2) energy dependence as a function of the probe‐to‐source position in 2D (determined with 2 mm resolution using a robotic arm), (3) the signal‐to‐noise ratio (SNR), (4) short‐term stability over 8 h, and (5) long‐term stability of three optical readers and four probes used for in vivo monitoring in HDR and PDR treatments over 21 months (196 treatments and 189 detector calibrations, and (6) dose‐rate dependence. Results: The total uncertainty of the detector at a 20 mm probe‐to‐source distance was < 5.1% and < 5.8% for the HDR and PDR versions, respectively. Regarding the above characteristics, (1) the sensitivity of the detector decreased by an average of 1.4%/°C for detector probe temperatures varying from 22 to 37°C; (2) the energy dependence of the detector was nonlinear and depended on both probe‐to‐source distance and the angle between the probe and the brachytherapy source; (3) the median SNRs were 187 and 34 at a 20 mm probe‐to‐source distance for the HDR and PDR versions, respectively (corresponding median source activities of 4.8 and 0.56 Ci, respectively); (4) the detector response varied by 0.6% in 11 identical irradiations over 8 h; (5) the sensitivity of the four detector probes decreased systematically by 0–1.2%/100 Gy of dose delivered to the probes, and random fluctuations of 4.8% in the sensitivity were observed for the three probes used in PDR and 1.9% for the probe used in HDR; and (6) the detector response was linear with dose rate. Conclusion: ZnSe:O detectors can be used effectively for in vivo dosimetry and with high accuracy for HDR and PDR brachytherapy applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]