These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Correction factors for source strength determination in HDR brachytherapy using the in-phantom method.
    Author: Ubrich F, Wulff J, Engenhart-Cabillic R, Zink K.
    Journal: Z Med Phys; 2014 May; 24(2):138-52. PubMed ID: 24021956.
    Abstract:
    For the purpose of clinical source strength determination for HDR brachytherapy sources, the German society for Medical Physics (DGMP) recommends in their report 13 the usage of a solid state phantom (Krieger-phantom) with a thimble ionization chamber. In this work, the calibration chain for the determination of the reference air-kerma rate Ka,100 and reference dose rate to waterDw,1 by ionization chamber measurement in the Krieger-phantom was modeled via Monte Carlo simulations. These calculations were used to determine global correction factors k(tot), which allows a user to directly convert the reading of an ionization chamber calibrated in terms of absorbed dose to water, into the desired quantity Ka,100 or Dw,1. The factor k(tot) was determined for four available (192)Ir sources and one (60)Co source with three different thimble ionization chambers. Finally, ionization chamber measurements on three μSelectron V2 HDR sources within the Krieger-phantom were performed and Ka,100 was determined according to three different methods: 1) using a calibration factor in terms of absorbed dose to water with the global correction factor [Formula: see text] according DGMP 13 2) using a global correction factor calculated via Monte Carlo 3) using a direct reference air-kerma rate calibration factor determined by the national metrology institute PTB. The comparison of Monte Carlo based [Formula: see text] with those from DGMP 13 showed that the DGMP data were systematically smaller by about 2-2.5%. The experimentally determined [Formula: see text] , based on the direct Ka,100 calibration were also systematically smaller by about 1.5%. Despite of these systematical deviations, the agreement of the different methods was in almost all cases within the 1σ level of confidence of the interval of their respective uncertainties in a Gaussian distribution. The application of Monte Carlo based [Formula: see text] for the determination of Ka,100 for three μSelectron V2 sources revealed the smallest deviation to the manufacturer's source certificate. With the calculated [Formula: see text] for a (60)Co source, the user is now able to accurately determine Ka,100 of a HDR (60)Co source via in-phantom measurement. Moreover, using the presented global correction factor [Formula: see text] , the user is able to determine the future source specification quantity Dw,1 with the same in-phantom setup.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]