Search

Purpose: The aims of this study were (i) to design a new high-dose-rate (HDR) brachytherapy applicator for treating surface lesions with planning target volumes larger than 3 cm in diameter and up to 5 cm in size, using the microSelectron-HDR or Flexitron afterloader (Elekta Brachytherapy) with a 192Ir source; (ii) to calculate by means of the Monte Carlo(MC) method the dose distribution for the new applicator when it is placed against a water phantom; and (iii) to validate experimentally the dose distributions in water. Methods: The penelope2008MC code was used to optimize dwell positions and dwell times. Next, the dose distribution in a water phantom and the leakage dose distribution around the applicator were calculated. Finally, MC data were validated experimentally for a 192Ir mHDR-v2 source by measuring (i) dose distributions with radiochromic EBT3 films (ISP); (ii) percentage depth–dose (PDD) curve with the parallel-plate ionization chamber Advanced Markus (PTW); and (iii) absolute dose rate with EBT3 films and the PinPoint T31016 (PTW) ionization chamber. Results: The new applicator is made of tungsten alloy (Densimet) and consists of a set of interchangeable collimators. Three catheters are used to allocate the source at prefixed dwell positions with preset weights to produce a homogenous dose distribution at the typical prescription depth of 3 mm in water. The same plan is used for all available collimators. PDD, absolute dose rate per unit of air kerma strength, and off-axis profiles in a cylindrical water phantom are reported. These data can be used for treatment planning. Leakage around the applicator was also scored. The dose distributions, PDD, and absolute dose rate calculated agree within experimental uncertainties with the doses measured: differences of MC data with chamber measurements are up to 0.8% and with radiochromic films are up to 3.5%. Conclusions: The new applicator and the dosimetric data provided here will be a valuable tool in clinical practice, making treatment of large skin lesions simpler, faster, and safer. Also the dose to surrounding healthy tissues is minimal.

Ir-192 wires have been used in low-dose-rate brachytherapy for many years. Commercially available treatment planning systems approximate the dose rate distribution of the straight or curved wires applying the superposition principle using one of the following methods: (i) The wire is modeled as a set of point sources, (ii) the wire is modeled as a set of small straight segment wires, (iii) the values of the parameters and functions of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 43 protocol are obtained for wire lengths between 3 and 7 cm assuming some simplifications. The dose rate distributions obtained using these methods for linear wires of different lengths and U-shaped wires present significant deviations compared to those obtained by Monte Carlo. In the present study we propose a new method to model 192Ir wires of any length and shape, named the Two Lengths based Segmented method. This method uses the formalism stated in the AAPM Task Group 43 protocol for two straight wires only, 0.5 and 1 cm, to obtain the dose rate distribution around wires of any length (down to 0.3 cm and up to 10 cm) improving on the results of the aforementioned ones. This method can easily be applied to dose calculations around other wires, such as Pd-103 ones.

The purposes of this study are: (i) to design field flattening filters for the Leipzig applicators of 2 and 3 cm of inner diameter with the source traveling parallel to the applicator contact surface, which are accessories of the microSelectron-HDR afterloader (Nucletron, Veenendaal, The Netherlands). These filters, made of tungsten, aim to flatten the heterogeneous dose distribution obtained with the Leipzig applicators. (ii) To estimate the dose rate distributions for these Leipzig+filter applicators by means of the Monte Carlo (MC) method. (iii) To experimentally verify these distributions for prototypes of these new applicators, and (iv) to obtain the correspondence factors to measure the output of the applicators by the user using an insert into a well chamber. The MC GEANT4 code has been used to design the filters and to obtain the dose rate distributions in liquid water for the two Leipzig+filter applicators. In order to validate this specific application and to guarantee that realistic source-applicator geometry has been considered, an experimental verification procedure was implemented in this study, in accordance with the updated recommendations of the American Association of Physicists in Medicine Task Group No. 43 U1 Report. Thermoluminescent dosimeters, radiochromic film, and a pin-point ionization chamber in a plastic [polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA)] phantom were used to verify the MC results for the two applicators of a microSelectron-HDR afterloader with the mHDR-v2 source. To verify the output of the Leipzig +filter applicators, correspondence factors were deduced for the well chambers HDR100-plus (Standard Imaging, Inc., Middleton, WI) and TM33004 (PTW, Freiburg, Germany) using a specific insert for both applicators. The doses measured in the PMMA phantom agree within experimental uncertainties with the dose obtained by the MC calculations. Percentage depth dose and off-axis profiles were obtained normalized at a depth of 3 mm along the central applicator axis in a cylindrical 20 x 20 cm water phantom. A table of output factors, normalized to 1 U of source air kerma strength at this depth, is presented. Correspondence factors were obtained for the two well chambers considered. The matrix data obtained in the MC simulation with a grid separation of 0.5 mm has been used to build a data set in a convenient format to model these distributions for routine use with a brachytherapy treatment planning system.

The H-type Leipzig applicators are accessories of the microSelectron-HDR system (Nucletron, Veenendaal, The Netherlands) for treatment of superficial malignancies. Recently, the dose rate distributions in liquid water for the whole set of applicators using both source models available for the microSelectron-HDR afterloaders have been obtained by means of the experimentally validated Monte Carlo (MC) code GEANT4. Also an output table (cGy/hU) at 3 mm depth on the applicator central axis was provided. The output verification of these applicators by the user, prior to their clinical use, present practical problems: small detectors such as thermoluminescent dosimeters or parallel-plate ionization chambers are not easily used for verification in a clinical environment as they require a rigid setup with the Leipzig applicator and a phantom. In contrast, well-type ionization chambers are readily available in radiotherapy departments. This study presents a technique based on the HDR1000Plus well chamber (Standar Imaging) measurements with a special insert, which allows the output verification of the H-type Leipzig applicators on a routine basis. This technique defines correspondence factors (CF) between the in water dose rate output of the Leipzig applicators (cGy/hU) obtained with MC and the reading on the well chamber with the special insert, normalized to themore » HDR calibration factor with the HDR insert and to the source strength. To commission the applicators (with the well chamber and the special insert used), the physicist should check if the CF value agrees with its tabulated values presented in this work. If the differences are within 5% the tabulated output values can be used in clinical dosimetry. This technique allows the output validation of the Leipzig applicators with a well chamber widely used for HDR Ir-192 source strength measurements. It can easily be adapted to other types of well chambers for HDR source output verification.« less

Purpose: Estimation of deviations between planned and delivered dose in Pulsed Doserate (PDR) brachytherapy for prostate cancer. Methods: A boost of 28.8 Gy is given with PDR brachytherapy in addition to 46 Gy delivered with External Beam RT. Brachytherapy is given in 24 pulses of 120 cGy, with an interpulse period time of 2.0 hours, resulting in a treatment time of over 46 hours. For 31 patients, additional CT‐scans were made apart from the Treatment Planning CT, i.e., one at 24 hours after start of PDR treatment and one shortly before finishing PDR treatment. On the second and third CT, the brachytherapy catheters were newly reconstructed and the treating physician delineated the PTV and organs at risk. Dwell positions and dwell times as used for the original Treatment Plan were imported into the newly reconstructed catheters and the dose distribution was recalculated. Plan comparison parameters were prostate V100 and D90 and rectum and bladder D2cc. Results: Averaged over 3 CT scans and all patients, the prostate V100 decreased 1.2% and D90 decreased 2.7%. For rectum, D2cc was within the tolerance dose (96 cGy/pulse) for all patients on the planning CT, but exceeded the tolerance dose on scan #2 in 7/31 patients with maximally 46% and in scan #3 in 5/25 patients with maximally 29%. Also for bladder D2cc was within the tolerance dose (120 cGy/pulse) for all patients on the planning CT. Here, the tolerance dose was exceeded on scan #2 in 2/31 patients with maximally 14% and in scan #3 in 3/25 patients with maximally 28%. Conclusions: In PDR prostate brachytherapy the relatively long treatment time has no clinically relevant deteriorating effect on the dosimetric quality of the treatment. PTV dose hardly deviates from planned dose, while OAR tolerance doses are rarely exceeded and only in small volumes. © 2012, American Association of Physicists in Medicine. All rights reserved.