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: Dosimetric characterization and output verification for conical brachytherapy surface applicators. Part II. High dose rate 192Ir sources.
    Author: Fulkerson RK, Micka JA, DeWerd LA.
    Journal: Med Phys; 2014 Feb; 41(2):022104. PubMed ID: 24506636.
    Abstract:
    PURPOSE: Historically, treatment of malignant surface lesions has been achieved with linear accelerator based electron beams or superficial x-ray beams. Recent developments in the field of brachytherapy now allow for the treatment of surface lesions with specialized conical applicators placed directly on the lesion. Applicators are available for use with high dose rate (HDR)(192)Ir sources, as well as electronic brachytherapy sources. Part I of this paper discussed the applicators used with electronic brachytherapy sources. Part II will discuss those used with HDR (192)Ir sources. Although the use of these applicators has gained in popularity, the dosimetric characteristics have not been independently verified. Additionally, there is no recognized method of output verification for quality assurance procedures with applicators like these. METHODS: This work aims to create a cohesive method of output verification that can be used to determine the dose at the treatment surface as part of a quality assurance/commissioning process for surface applicators used with HDR electronic brachytherapy sources (Part I) and(192)Ir sources (Part II). Air-kerma rate measurements for the (192)Ir sources were completed with several models of small-volume ionization chambers to obtain an air-kerma rate at the treatment surface for each applicator. Correction factors were calculated using MCNP5 and EGSnrc Monte Carlo codes in order to determine an applicator-specific absorbed dose to water at the treatment surface from the measured air-kerma rate. Additionally, relative dose measurements of the surface dose distributions and characteristic depth dose curves were completed in-phantom. RESULTS: Theoretical dose distributions and depth dose curves were generated for each applicator and agreed well with the measured values. A method of output verification was created that allows users to determine the applicator-specific dose to water at the treatment surface based on a measured air-kerma rate. CONCLUSIONS: The novel output verification methods described in this work will reduce uncertainties in dose delivery for treatments with these kinds of surface applicators, ultimately improving patient care.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]