Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 9, 2025
Proton Therapy Delivery and Its Clinical Application in Select Solid Tumor Malignancies
Published on: February 6, 2019
Source position evaluation using X-ray fluoroscopy of the Geneva and Venezia applicators for brachytherapy: An
Sayaka Kihara1, Yoshihiro Ueda2, Masahiro Morimoto2
1Department of Radiation Oncology, Osaka International Cancer Institute, Chuo-ku, Osaka, Japan; Medical Physics Laboratory, Division of Health Science, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Osaka, Suita, Osaka, Japan.
Purpose:
This study aimed to evaluate the inter-applicator differences in source positions of the Geneva and Venezia applicators by using X-ray fluoroscopy to perform direct measurements of iridium-192 (192Ir) source positions.
Materials And Methods:
Offset measurements of two to six sets of Geneva tandem and ovoid applicators and Venezia tandem applicators were performed. Each applicator was irradiated with 192Ir at the most distal position and X-ray fluoroscopy images were acquired. The offset values were measured as the distance from the applicator tip to the center of 192Ir source. For two sets of the Venezia ovoid applicators (set 1 and set 2), X-ray fluoroscopy images were acquired at a 2-mm step from the most distal position. The 192Ir source positions were compared with the expected source positions using an applicator modeling module.
Results:
The differences in offset values of the same types of applicators were up to 0.6 mm for Geneva tandem and ovoid applicators and 0.3 mm for Venezia tandem applicators. The mean standard deviation calculated for the same applicator types was 0.1 mm across all applicators. For Venezia ovoid applicators, the mean difference between 192Ir source positions and expected source positions were 0.1 mm for the set 1 applicator (maximum: 0.6 mm) and -0.2 mm for the set 2 applicator (maximum: 0.6 mm).
Conclusion:
This study demonstrated the feasibility of direct source position measurements using X-ray fluoroscopy. These results emphasize the need for commissioning all applicator, but individual characterization is unnecessary in clinical practice if differences fall within tolerance.
